ject, laymen who are knowlable and inter-
ested, know what it means. I think to go
to a word which is unknown is bad.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thirty seconds, Mr.
Case.
DELEGATE CASE: I would support
the motion and hope the action of the Com-
mittee taken, earlier this afternoon would
be reversed.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: Mr. Chairman, I
just feel it necessary to answer one of the
points Delegate Case has made. I thought
the answer to Delegate Burdette made it
clear. We are not bound and the issue is
really not special legislation. Its legal
drawbacks have been pointed out to us. We
are willing to abide by superior legal minds
who sit here. However, the phrase "emer-
gency legislation," appears in the present
Constitution only in Article XVI in refer-
ence to the referendum; it does not appear
in terms of power of the legislature and it
is defined only here. Again, the main rea-
son we sought a definite designation was
not that we wanted in any way to limit the
legislation but that rather on the contrary,
while the great thrust here has been
strengthening the legislature, we wanted
them to be permitted to enact laws that
would not be suspendable but not limited
by the narrow definition included in the
present Constitution.
THE CHAIRMAN: Has anyone thought
of the use. of the words nonsuspendable
legislation? Then everybody would know
what we were talking about. Does Delegate
Bamberger wish to speak on this? Dele-
gate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: I favor a re-
consideration, and I am one of those who
will reconsider, but for a reason which I
do not think has been emphasized. The dif-
ference between the two bills as to nomen-
clature is one that I would leave to the
word surgeons when the time comes. Both
are seeking the same object. But there is an
additional difference between these two
bills, one to which I believe we ought to
give a little more attention.
That is the fact that the Committee bill
requires that its suspendability by what-
ever terms may be used is one that must be
announced when the bill is introduced. The
other, the Hostetter amendment, provides
for a situation with which we have some
familiarity. That is, that we may attach
to the bill the requirement that it become
what we call "emergency legislation,^' and |
therefore non-suspendable at any time on
its way through the General Assembly.
Sometimes that head of steam that is
needed to make certain that the bill will be
non-suspendable is not learned about or
determined until the bill is on its way
through. It is easy to say you may introduce
another bill which may be non-suspendable
and start over again, but the legislature
may have adopted by that time some re-
strictive rules which may make it difficult
to start all over again.
For that reason I shall vote for the re-
consideration and for-the Hostetter amend-
ment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: A point of par-
liamentary procedure, Mr. Chairman: 1
should like to introduce an amendment to
the Committee terminology as passed by
this Committee of the Whole earlier. Shall
we vote on the reconsideration first?
THE CHAIRMAN: I think we would
have to dispose of the motion to reconsider,
and then the amendment would be before
the body and we could take another vote on
reconsideration of Amendment No. 6, I be-
lieve it was.
If the body is ready, we will submit the
question.
The Chair recognizes Delegate Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Mr. Chair-
man, I would like to address a question to
Delegate Koss or Delegate Hostetter. A
few months ago I think when the Fair
Housing Bill was in the Senate and also
in the House, it was passed by the Senate
and the House, and of course a group of
people in the State of Maryland decided
to draw up a petition. The petition was
circulated to put this particular bill on the
referendum.
I would like to ask either Delegate Koss
or Delegate Hostetter, whether under the
definition of this particular proposal, Dele-
gate Hostetter's amendment, could the Fair
Housing Law, be defined as an emergency
law?
DELEGATE HOSTETTER: I doubt it.
I do not believe it was an emergency law,
and it was subject to referendum.
I believe they got the required signatures,
but it failed for another reason.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: I would like
to add this question: in view of the fact |
