I think it was generally agreed by all
the factions within the Committee that the
present 70-day session of the General As-
sembly is too short. This was predicated in
large measure on the testimony that we
heard before the Committee covering the
fact that the Ways and Means Committee
and Finance Committee of the Senate could
not with any degree of genuine judgment
really consider the budget in the proper
fashion in so short a period of time as 70
days; and certainly the suggestion in the
draft constitution that the budget be auto-
matically adopted if it were not acted upon
within 50 days was one which met with
uniform opposition of everyone. We will
hear more on this particular subject matter
when Delegate Sherbow's Committee re-
ports.
I think in actuality—
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Will the gen-
tleman yield?
THE CHAIRMAN: Will Delegate Galla-
gher yield to a question?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: There will be
no compulsory enactment of the budget.
There will be, of course, time limits within
which it must be enacted, but nothing that
says automatically or ipso facto it goes
into effect.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Thank you,
Judge Sherbow. We assumed as much be-
cause you received the same kind of oppo-
sition to that proposal as we did.
I believe as Chairman of the Committee
that the compromise which the Committee
has struck upon—I hesitate to use the name
of the delegate who came up with the com-
promise because he, from time to time, had
differing views about his fatherhood of
that matter—but I think the compromise in
actuality is one which ought to allow for
the handling of the problems not only in
the foreseeable future, but in the not too
foreseeable future.
The genuine objection to the proposal
that a legislature set its own time limit
was that the legislature is made up of hu-
man beings who like everybody else pro-
crastinate. If you do not provide a specific
date by which they are required to do some-
thing, there will be the human tendency to
put off doing whatever would ordinarily
have to be done by a certain date.
I suppose that we perhaps more than any
other body which has ever met in the State |
of Maryland in this Constitutional Conven-
tion feel the wings of time fleeting along
because we are looking at January 12,
1968, with a realization that if we do not
complete our job, indeed the labors will
have been in vain.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher,
the date is December 12, 1967.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
I wish the other committee chairmen
every success in that endeavor, Mr. Chair-
man, I assure you.
Be that as it may, whatever this alleged
doubt of finality may be, nevertheless the
advantage of having a definite date on
which one can expect to adjourn without
return is important.
So in urging you to support the Commit-
tee finding and vote against the amend-
ment, I am telling you I do believe that the
Committee came up with a compromise
which ought to take care of the particular
problems over the long haul. I ask you to
support the Committee majority and to
oppose the amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: Mr. Chairman, first
I would like to clear up a point that has
been raised by a number of people, namely
would the Minority Report recommendation
apply to the present General Assembly?
The answer is by all means, no. Nor would
the Majority Report. The schedule would
indicate that the next Assembly would be
affected by it.
Now, may I call on the second speaker,
or do we have—
THE CHAIRMAN: You may allocate
your time to whomever you choose.
DELEGATE BARD: I would like to
have Delegate Royce Hanson speak. I would
like to delegate three minutes to Delegate
Hanson, but I see Delegate Powers stand-
ing.
THE CHAIRMAN: Make your election.
To whom do you allocate the time?
DELEGATE BARD: I allocate the time
to Delegate Hanson, but if there is going
to be, Mr. Chairman, a break in that—
THE CHAIRMAN: I will take care of
it; if you will announce your election.
DELEGATE BARD: I am happy to
know you are flexible.
(Laughter.) |
