same, with one exception: When the article
was adopted, 10,000 signatures were re-
quired to petition a statewide law to refer-
endum. In 1962 the General Assembly pro-
posed an amendment to set this figure at
three percent of the number who had voted
in the last gubernatorial election. This
amendment was ratified in the election held
in November of the same year. At that
time 193,840 voted for the amendment,
124,600 voted against. Forty percent of the
people who went to the polls on that day
voted on the amendment.
The effect of this amendment was to re-
quire that at the time of its ratification
approximately 23,000 signatures were nec-
essary to petition an act to referendum.
The Committee memorandum includes on
page 9 a table indicating all the acts which
have been successfully petitioned to refer-
endum, and the results on these issues. Of
the 12 questions submitted to a vote of the
people, the action of the legislature was
upheld on 8 occasions, and on 4 occasions
acts were rejected.
The Committee engaged in extensive re-
search on the subject of referendum, not
only in Maryland, but also on its use in
other states.
The Committee devoted twelve working
days to discussion and consideration of this
subject, exclusive of the various lengths of
time that were spent on research. The Com-
mittee heard from representatives who had
taken an active part in various petition
drives. The technical aspects of the refer-
endum procedure were discussed with rep-
resentatives of the Attorney General's of-
fice. The Committee has made every effort
to explore all of the possible ramifications
of the various proposals which were re-
ferred to us.
The Committee reached its conclusions
only after giving full consideration to the
experience of Maryland, both from the
point of view of the participation of the
citizens, and to the impact upon the legis-
lative process.
I would like to quote from our memo-
randum accompanying S&E-I at page 2:
"The Committee was concerned that the
requirements for the referendum provision
be sufficient to prevent frivolous use to
frustrate legislative action, but also that
the requirements permit use of the tool if
a significant number of voters wish to do
so."
The Committee was unanimous that the |
referendum should continue to be a part of
our constitution.
At this point I would like to remind you
that our Committee based its recommenda-
tions upon two assumptions: (1) that the
legislature will pass only public general
laws; and (2) that the present procedure
that each bill shall embrace but a single
subject will be continued.
I might say parenthetically that I re-
viewed very briefly and superficially, so
far, the first recommendation of the Local
Government Committee, and I do not think
there is anything in that recommendation
and report that is done any disservice or
any harm by any of our provisions; and I
think that the assumptions, until I stand
corrected, that the Committee made remain
valid.
Section I of S&E-I is a simple declara-
tive statement, similar in language to our
present Constitution. The people reserve to
themselves the power known as the refer-
endum.
Section 2 discusses, or provides for what
legislation is subject to referendum.
The present Constitution exempts from
referendum any law making an appropria-
tion for maintaining the state government
or for maintaining or aiding any public
institution, not exceeding the next previous
appropriation for the same purpose. In
other words, it does permit increases in
appropriations to be petitioned.
The present Constitution also exempts
legislation licensing, regulating, prohibit-
ing, or submitting to local option the manu-
facture of malt or spiritus liquors. The
Committee recommendation differs from
the present Constitution in that it exempts
the entire appropriation for maintaining
state government or for maintaining or
aiding any public institution and would
not permit the increase over the previous
appropriation to be petitioned.
The present Constitution has been inter-
preted to mean that certain tax measures
are appropriations measures within the
meaning of Article XVI. The Committee
wishes to be explicit in its intention to ex-
clude tax measures from the referendum
process.
The Committee is confident that the new
constitution will provide for prompt and
equitable apportionment, districting, and
Congressional districting. For this reason,
the Committee has excepted such legisla-
tion from coverage by this article. |
