member of Congress have been a resident
of his state for two years, as you are re-
quiring for the state legislature. It merely
requires him to be an inhabitant on the
day he is elected.
If you are using the federal model as an
argument in favor of your proposal, why
did you depart from the model in that re-
spect?
DELEGATE HOPKINS: The two year
residence requirement?
DELEGATE CHABOT: Yes.
DELEGATE HOPKINS: I think the
state legislature is a little different from
the federal Constitution. I think the ques-
tion of a citizen coming down here to repre-
sent the interests of the State of Maryland
is a little different from a person who goes
to the federal Congress who might have
been a citizen of some other part of the
county.
We did not go into that in great detail.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: Do you know
whether, when this provision of the United
States Constitution was written, the drafts-
men contemplated separate districts for
members of Congress?
DELEGATE HOPKINS: I suspect you
have the answer to that.
DELEGATE CHABOT: No, I don't; but
I suspect that that might be one reason
why there was no mention of a district re-
quirement.
DELEGATE HOPKINS: Of course,
what we were trying to point out at the
moment was what happened in practice.
We merely tried to point to the fact that
at the congressional level we do not have
a requirement of people filing from a dis-
trict in which they live. We were using it
only for that purpose.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Weide-
meyer.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Would
the Chairman answer this question? Would
the effect of this amendment be to allow a
senatorial candidate from Montgomery
County who has filed for election to Con-
gress to go to the fourth district of Balti-
more and receive the approbation of the
voters there?
DELEGATE HOPKINS: He said "Mr.
Chairman," but I think he means me.
THE CHAIRMAN: You addressed the |
question to the Chair. You meant to ad-
dress it to the minority spokesman.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Yes.
DELEGATE HOPKINS: What would
prevent somebody who ran from asking—
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: The
question was would this amendment allow a
senatorial candidate seeking a state senate
seat, being from Montgomery County and
having lost for Congress there, from run-
ning in the fourth district of Baltimore
City for State senator?
DELEGATE HOPKINS: Nothing would
prevent it except the voters.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Thank
you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Boileau.
DELEGATE HOPKINS: May I speak
further?
THE CHAIRMAN: You may proceed.
DELEGATE HOPKINS: I did not wish
to bring this up. There is an example in
the history of the State of Maryland where
someone filed for Congress from a district
in which he did not reside, and the voters
took very good care of him.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Boileau.
DELEGATE BOILEAU: Delegate Hop-
kins, certainly one of the advantages or po-
tential advantages of the bicameral system
is the potential for greater representation
if two houses are different enough in na-
ture. Was any thought given to the possi-
bility of offering this rule only for one of
the houses, possibly the senate, so there
would be a difference in the nature of the
representation in either house as a poten-
tial matter of bicameralism?
DELEGATE HOPKINS: There was no
thought given to this because we thought of
creating fairness for every senator and
every delegate. We did not consider that.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Childs.
DELEGATE CHILDS: Delegate Hop-
kins, is there anything in your proposal
which would prevent a resident of Garrett
County from running for senator in the
senatorial district comprising Worcester
County?
DELEGATE HOPKINS: This question
seems to be being asked over and over again
in different forms. There is nothing what-
soever. We could all go out of these halls
and run anywhere in the State of Mary-
land. |
