clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 679   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
[Nov. 13] DEBATES 679
READING CLERK: Amendment No. I
to Amendment No. 6 to Committee Recom-
mendation S&E-I by Delegate Chabot: On
page I, strike out lines 9 and 10 of Amend-
ment No. 6 to Committee Recommendation
No. S&E-I and insert in lieu thereof the
following: "nonsuspendable,".
THE CHAIRMAN: For what purposes
does Delegate Sollins rise?
DELEGATE SOLLINS: We would like
to have copies of Delegate Hostetter's
amendment and also of Delegate Chabot's
amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: We will suspend the
proceedings until those have been distrib-
uted. Every legitimate complaint will be
recognized. For what purpose does Dele-
gate Kiefer rise?
DELEGATE KIEFER: A matter of per-
sonal privilege. I just would like to an-
nounce, sir, while all these amendments are
floating around, that we are very happy to
announce for and on behalf of Delegate
Price, Bruce Price, the arrival of a son
this morning at four o'clock, always an
inconvenient time, weighing seven and a
half pounds. Mother and child are doing
well, and we wish them all well.
(Applause.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Does everyone have
a copy of the amendment?
It is Amendment No. 3 really, but it has
been renumbered 6. We will see that copies
of the amendment are distributed.
I have been advised that there was not
a sufficient number of copies originally
printed and I think this possibly accounts
for the shortage. Does everyone have a
copy of the amendment?
We are short on copies of the amendment
so we cannot proceed until we have a suffi-
cient number of copies supplied. I am ad-
vised they will be here shortly.
In the meantime, do you have any objec-
tion to proceeding with Delegate Chabot's
amendment to the amendment? We will
not take any votes until everyone is sup-
plied with the basic amendment, and I am
just wondering if there would be any objec-
tion to proceeding with Delegate Chabot's
amendment to the amendment, with the
proviso that he make a full explanation of
exactly what his amendment to the amend-
ment is doing and with the proviso further
that we will not take any vote until every-
one is supplied with copies of both the
amendment and the Chabot amendment.
The Chair recognizes Delegate Sybert.
DELEGATE SYBERT: Mr. Chairman,
in order to make certain we have the right
copy of what we are supposed to be con-
sidering, I have before me one marked
Amendment No. blank to Amendment No. 3.
Would that be a correct copy?
THE CHAIRMAN: That is correct.
DELEGATE SYBERT: Should that not
be marked now Amendment No. 6 to
Amendment No. 5?
THE CHAIRMAN: No, Amendment No.
I to Amendment No. 6.
DELEGATE SYBERT: Thank you very
much. It is very important to clarify the
situation. The Clerk will read to you ex-
actly what is before us.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. I
to Amendment No. 6 to Committee Recom-
mendation S&E-I by Delegate Chabot: On
page I, strike out lines 9 and 10 of Amend-
ment No. 6 to Committee Recommendation
No. S&E-I, and insert in lieu thereof the
following: "nonsuspendable".
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Chabot, who will give us a
full explanation.
DELEGATE CHABOT: Mr. Chairman,
the purpose of this amendment is to pre-
serve Delegate Hostetter's objective, ap-
parently, of rejecting the Commission's
language and to preserve the present re-
quirement that as to each bill that the
legislature wants to make nonsuspendable,
it has to go through a procedure clearly
designated to all its members that the bill
would be nonsuspendable. In this matter,
as I say, it is in contradiction to Amend-
ment No. 5, which had been introduced and
then withdrawn a few minutes ago, and in
this matter it is in agreement with the ob-
jective of the Committee.
However, the Committee having seen
what has happened with the use of the
word "emergency" and the definition which
presently appears in the Constitution, and
with the way the courts have handled the
use of the word "emergency", at least with
regard to public general laws, the Commit-
tee had concluded that there is no longer
any need for preserving this use of the
word, which simply deludes both the pub-
lic and perhaps to some extent the mem-
bers of the General Assembly. The use of
the word "emergency" in this manner, al-
though it is twenty-five years old, has de-
teriorated into an essentially Mickey Mouse


 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 679   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  August 16, 2024
Maryland State Archives