THE PRESIDENT: Is there a second?
(The motion was duly seconded.)
The motion is duly made that the calen-
dar be approved and that the rules be sus-
pended to permit the consideration at this
session of Item 52 on the calendar. Are you
ready for the question? All those in favor,
signify by saying Aye; contrary, No. The
Ayes have it. It is so ordered.
I call on Delegate Scanlan, Chairman of
the Committee on Rules, Credentials and
Convention Budget, and inasmuch as the
report from Delegate Scanlan may be some-
what detailed, I suggest he come to the
Reading Clerk's desk and give his report.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: Mr. President,
fellow delegates, I have the honor of pre-
senting the first report of the Committee
on Rules, Credentials and Convention
Budget. As you will recall, the report was
distributed at the conclusion of our first
session, our opening session on September
12. It has now laid over for the required
two session days. I would like briefly to
summarize it. Most of you, I am sure, have
read it, and I will not try to duplicate the
written comments you have before you.
With the approval, Mr. President, of
yourself and the delegates, I would like to
pass now but later return to the matter
covered on the first page and a half of our
report, that is, the material dealing with
the proposed amendment to Amendment No-
5, and take up the report in the middle of
page 2, where we recommend a clarifying
amendment that turns out to be not a
clarifying amendment. We were right the
first time. The Parliamentarian has checked,
and I would like to withdraw at this time
at least the proposed amendment to Rule 20.
That brings us to Rule 20A [21], which
is a proposed substantive change. Without
reading the entire proposed new rule, that
the Committee on Rules has offered for
your consideration, I would like to say this.
It is a rule that would put a limit on the
length of time that a delegate can hold
the floor in a discussion or debate. The
limit would be fifteen minutes. However,
there are a number of conspicuous excep-
tions to what at first blush might seem to
be a restriction on free speech.
The first conspicuous exception is that
at any time a majority of the delegates
present vote for it, a delegate can extend
his remarks. The second important excep-
tion to it is that a chairman of a committee
presenting his report can speak longer than
the fifteen-minute interval. Obviously some |
committee reports will be very lengthy, and
require extended explanation and discussion.
A similar privilege is afforded the minor-
ity spokesman in defending a minority re-
port of a committee of this Convention.
I think in point of fact, it is a rule that
hopefully it would never have to be used.
It would be used, I think, at the one par-
ticular point where its use would be effica-
cious, in the closing days of this Conven-
tion when we are debating either on second
or third reading when the minority, blessed
with stamina and lung power, could make
an extended stand. In the ordinary legisla-
tive body it would not make a great deal
of difference. But, when you have a dead-
line, as we have, to get your work done, it
would mean that in the end, provided the
minority was determined enough and strong
and persistent enough, the minority could
require the majority to capitulate, com-
promise in a way that the majority other-
wise might not want to compromise; but
I think the ordinary case, most of the days
of this Convention, if the delegate went
over the fifteen-minute limit, very little
would be done about it, and if he needed
to get permission of the Convention, I am
sure it would be given. The Congress of the
United States has a similar rule in, I be-
lieve, the Committee of the Whole. For
those reasons the Committee has recom-
mended the adoption of a new Rule 20A
[21].
Now we have also recommended an
amendment to Rule 2I [22]. Unless this
amendment is adopted, I am afraid not only
the former governor of this State but two
of its distinguished legislators, Senator
James and Senator dark will have to be
expelled from their seats. As you will re-
call, Rule 2I [22] requires us all to be
seated alphabetically. The change we sug-
gest would legalize the seating location of
Governor Tawes, Senator James, Senator
Clark and the President. I assume there is
really no great dispute about that.
There is a proposed amendment to Rule
24 [25]. That is the rule that deals with
the Committee of the Whole. As the rule is
now written, it restricts the Committee of
the Whole from referring a report to any
committee — I am sorry — as the rule is
now written, there is some doubt whether
a committee could sit when the Committee
of the Whole was sitting. Delegate Chabot
brought this up, I believe, in July and sug-
gested that we ought to make it clear that
the committee could sit if it got the per-
mission of the Committee of the Whole.
Otherwise, you might run into a situation |
