are we planning to tie the hands of the
people. We are simply trying to make it
appear that if the people are interested, if
they really want to be involved, let them
do so but let them prove their intentions.
Our third point is that evidence has been
secured which shows that signatures are
relatively easy to secure. We have appear-
ing before us some students from Maryland
U, and within a very short period of time
they had secured 5,000 signatures.
If the people will organize, I do not think
that the figures we have before you in our
report are unattainable. Delegate Koss
said the figures fall off in the third month.
This may be true, but it also carries out
our thought that if the people are sincere,
if they are really and truly planning to go
through the referendum, then in the third
month they will follow through and get the
required number of signatures.
For these reasons, I would hope that you
would favor our Minority Report.
Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Delegate
Murray.
In order to balance this out, the Chair
must allocate another three minutes for
the pros people in favor of the amendment.
Dr. Pullen.
DELEGATE PULLEN: Mr. Chairman,
I reluctantly take issue with my sweet
colleague from Prince Georges County.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is the doctor in
favor of the amendment?
DELEGATE PULLEN: No, sir; I am
against it.
THE CHAIRMAN: In order to balance
out the time, the Chair is going to be forced
to recognize another speaker, who is for
the amendment, in order that each side
will have six minutes.
DELEGATE PULLEN: That is per-
fectly agreeable with me.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone who
wishes to speak in favor of the amendment?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAN: No one wishes to
speak in favor of the amendment.
I will recognize Delegate Pullen to speak
against.
DELEGATE PULLEN: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. |
Somewhere in the Declaration of Rights
in the Virginia Constitution of 1776 there
is reference to the Constitution getting
back occasionally to fundamental prin-
ciples. I am afraid we are trying to inter-
pret and guide human nature by a system
of mathematics. It cannot be done.
The story is told of an astronomer who
could predict with mathematical exactitude
where a certain planet would be at 12:0I
A.M. in the year 2067, but the same man
could not tell where his own daughter was
going to be at 11:00 P.M. that night.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I am old-fashioned
enough to believe that the right thing is
the ultimate wisdom of people if they have
the facts. The big question here is, have
the people of Maryland abused this privi-
lege?
If you will turn to page 9 of the report
of the Committee, you will find some rather
interesting results.
In 1966, 538,360 people voted on the is-
sue, in which it was turned down by 40,476.
The year before, 644,220 voted in the refer-
endum, and the motion of the bill was
carried by 41,210, and so on down the line,
Mr. Chairman, as far back as 1938. Only
twelve cases were brought before the
people.
It is a rather interesting thing and some-
thing that strikes me rather strongly at
this time, that the lowest number of voters
in any referendum voted for this Conven-
tion, 190,000. In 1938, 224,000 voted. I do
not think it makes too much difference, ex-
cept one point: that it ought to be easy
for the people to judge what their legisla-
ture has done. After all, the legislature is
not infallible either.
I stood in this room some twenty years
ago and saw the political powers of my
county come up with a proposal that was
political in nature, to take over the insur-
ance contracts in Baltimore County. True,
that was a local bill but the people turned
that down, nearly 90,0.00 to about 17,000.
All I think is this—
THE CHAIRMAN: Thirty seconds, Dele-
gate Pullen.
DELEGATE PULLEN: That is all I
need.
Justice Holmes said, if the law does not
prohibit it, let them have it. I do not be-
lieve we should put roadblocks in the way
of the wishes of the people.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele- |
