lation enacted by a county governing body
would have the same available information
and the basis could be used without any
difficulty.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Mr. Chair-
man.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Will the gen-
tleman yield for a question?
DELEGATE CHABOT: Certainly.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Delegate
Chabot, my question is based on your last
statement. In the Committee's report we
are dealing with a sum certain which is
five percent of the last vote, and the secre-
tary of state certifies it. We know exactly
what it is. In a very close fight, where the
effort is to get the petition signed and in
under the wire at the last moment, I sub-
mit to you, isn't it a serious question as to
the number, if, for example, in any heavily
populated areas of the State for other rea-
sons there is a concerted drive to get a
large number of people on the registration
books?
Isn't it likely, under those circumstances,
that you will not know the number of
those who are registered at the time you
file your petition?
DELEGATE CHABOT: Delegate Sher-
bow, we have, as I say, a statement coming
out of the same office as to the total elec-
tion figures, that is, the office of the secre-
tary of state, as to the registration figures
at the time of the general election on No-
vember 8, 1966. I do not think that there
is any more practical difficulty in obtain-
ing those figures than there would be in
obtaining the election figures.
There are times when we have a close
election, as some of the delegates here may
be very mindful of, when it takes quite a
while before we get final figures for the
election also.
As to whether or not there are drives to
get voters on the registration books which
might create the possibilities of potential
fraud, if you were getting voters on the
books who should not be there, I do not
think there is any more difficulty or proba-
bility of difficulty along that line than there
is probability of difficulty along the line of
falsifying the vote in the gubernatorial
election.
Certainly much more is at stake, and the
incentive would be much greater than there
would be with regard to false registration. |
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Storm.
DELEGATE STORM: I have a question,
Delegate Chabot.
Would it be better to use, rather than
persons qualified to vote, persons regis-
tered to vote? Would this simplify the
definition and make it a little more sure?
DELEGATE CHABOT: I would not
personally have an objection, if there are
some delegates who feel that that creates
a problem. We had intended that the terms
be interchangeable, registration merely be-
ing one of the requirements for a person
to be qualified.
I believe that—may I inquire as to
whether or not my co-sponsor would ob-
ject to that change?
My co-sponsors would not object to that
change, and if there would be no objection
in the body and there is a feeling that it
might make a difference, we would be glad
to change the word "qualified" to the word
"registered."
DELEGATE STORM: My reasoning on
this is we can tell who is registered much
more readily than we can tell who are
qualified and not registered, so I think this
strengthens your proposal.
Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: This is not a formal
amendment. It is not presented yet. It will
be presented when the minority presents its
report. If Delegate Storm wishes to make
a motion that the word "qualified" be
changed to "registered", in the absence of
objection we might be able to handle it
that way.
That amendment has not been formally
presented yet.
Have you concluded your remarks?
DELEGATE CHABOT: Yes, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you want to
formally present your amendments now?
The pages will distribute the amendments,
if they are available.
This would be No. 7 being distributed.
The Clerk will read Amendment No. 7.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 7
to Committee Recommendation S&E-I, by
Delegate Chabot, D. S. Murray, and
Schloeder:
Section 3 of Committee Recommendation
S&E-I is amended by striking out, on page |
