as opposed to commercial collection of sig-
natures is very interesting. The commercial
firm is sustained with the ninety days.
There are firms, and I am sure all of you
know this, who permit their employees to
take time off and go out and solicit signa-
tures. There are also agencies that pay for
signatures, but not the average citizen
volunteer group. They do not have these
funds. They need the time, and they need
a reasonable amount of signatures.
I suggest to you that there is a perfect
compromise between the three percent of
today and the five percent of the guber-
natorial vote recommended in this amend-
ment. It is workable. It is applicable, and
it is within reach, but not to the point
that it would abuse the legislature, and
since we are strengthening the governor
and strengthening the legislature, let us
not weaken the people to the point where
they have no voice.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Schloeder.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: At this
time I yield three minutes to Delegate
Marion.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: Mr. President,
because I believe that one of the most in-
sidious evils in the referendum process is
the ability to suspend legislation passed
by duly elected representatives of all of the
people of the state, a process of suspend-
ability by a small minority of citizens, I
support this amendment.
As I see it, it places a premium on refer-
ability of law, but makes more difficult,
and rightfully so, the process by which a
law can be suspended and prevented from
taking effect, even though passed by the
representatives of our people.
Last week in this Convention we placed
a check on hasty, ill-considered legislation
by adopting a bicameral legislature. I see
no need to place a further check on hasty,
ill-considered legislation by allowing the
referendum provisions to be as easy as the
Committee has recommended that they be.
Put another way, I would think that it
is desirable to place a check on the hasty,
ill-considered action of a small minority of
citizens to block legislation. The value of
a referendum process for Maryland, as
any other State, is far more important be-
fore reapportionment because before re-
apportionment a minority, or a majority
of the representatives in the General As-
sembly, although representing a minority |
of the citizens of the State, could enact
legislation affecting all citizens of the State.
With reapportionment and fully expecting
and anticipating what may yet come from
the Committee on the Legislative Branch,
I would hope that there would be less need
for the referendum process than before in
the State of Maryland.
I do not believe, Mr. President, that we
should permit the referral or the possible
suspension of a law which has been duly
considered and passed by the representa-
tives of all the people—
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion
has twenty seconds—
DELEGATE MARION:—by a small but
energetic minority.
I believe that such a process should be
reserved for those occasions when the ef-
fect of that law cuts deeply into the fabric
of the body politic and I would, therefore,
urge support of this amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: I have no one else
to say anything.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Schloeder,
do you have any further statements?
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Yes. I
would yield the remaining time to Dele-
gate Chabot.
THE CHAIRMAN: There are eight
minutes remaining for the proponent.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Mr. Chair-
man, I do not want to frighten anybody, or
send anybody to the doors. I will yield two
minutes to Delegate Chabot.
THE, CHAIRMAN: Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: Thank you.
I certainly will not use eight minutes. I
just wanted to rise to one point that has
found its way as a refrain into some of the
comments of some of those who have spoken
against the amendment. It is that we are
trying to put the entire referendum process
out of reach of the people. I would like to
point out that in Alaska there is a require-
ment that a petition be signed by at least
ten percent of those who voted in the pro-
ceeding general election, and that it include
signatures from at least two-thirds of the
election districts from the State. This is
something that we could have followed if
our purpose was to put the referendum out
of the reach of the people. |
