clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 719   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
[Nov. 13] DEBATES 719
subject matter. The legislature would react
to one 90,000-petition, would amend it, but
not to the satisfaction of the proponents,
however to such an extent that it becomes
obnoxious to them and they then mount
another 90,000-petition. I think it could
happen, but I do not see that particularly
as an abuse of the system. It would merely
present two questions on the ballot.
I might add here that I do not think the
people would have difficulty. The people
participate in these questions before they
go to the ballot. 1 heard a group of refer-
ences that they cannot understand the
small print in the ballot booth. I think we
read papers and understand arguments
and invite speakers, and this is how the
issues are developed, not by going into the
booth and voting blindly. I think in the
circumstance you suggest there is the possi-
bility, but I think this would simply stimu-
late debate to a greater extent than it
would be if you only had the one issue.
I do not see it as an abuse.
DELEGATE CARDIN: Do you have any
knowledge of how often this happened in
states that do now have initiative or direct
initiative?
DELEGATE BYRNES: In surveying
the use of the initiative nationally I did
not find conflicts, and this was simply by
reading the topics of initiative proposals,
not by any expensive research into the
matter.
DELEGATE CARDIN: I suggest that
some constitutions have provided for a
type of decision made on the ballot.
DELEGATE BYRNES: I think you are
referring to a situation where there is a
question presented by two conflicting pro-
posals or two proposals that have conflict-
ing sections; in that case there is a re-
quirement in some constitutions that simply
majority vote controls.
THE CHAIRMAN: Point of inquiry.
Could you force the legislature to build a
bridge at a particular point?
DELEGATE BYRNES: Would 1 see the
legislature—
THE CHAIRMAN: Point of inquiry.
Could you use the petition to force a legis-
lature to build a road at a particular point
or bridge or public facility?

DELEGATE BARNES: We have ex-
empted from our proposal all of the items
that have been exempted from referendum,
Delegate James. The answer is no.
THE CHAIRMAN: Not too sure of that.
Delegate Wagandt.
DELEGATE WAGANDT: Delegate
Byrnes, mentioned the requirement of 10
per cent of the total votes cast for gover-
nor in the last preceding election. Is this
a common requirement, this high a total in
the states that do have the initiative or in-
direct initiative?
DELEGATE BYRNES: Ten per cent
figure?
DELEGATE WAGANDT: Yes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: It is not com-
mon. The average, as I understand it, if
I may be very general, is about 6.8 per
cent. I think that is the median. I have seen
it ten, but more often ranging from five
to eight, and it usually relates to the prior
gubernatorial vote.
DELEGATE WAGANDT: How fre-
quently is the initiative used in the states
that have it at the present time? Do you
have any figures?
DELEGATE BYRNES: Yes, I can
again refer you to the memorandum we
prepared to accompany relegate Proposal
57. If I am not mistaken, it was used na-
tionally during the period surveyed 72
times, 67 or 72. Initiative and referendum
together were used 67 to 72 times. Of that
number, I think a little more than half
were one of the two types of initiative,
either direct or indirect.
DELEGATE WAGANDT: Over how
long, a period of time was that?
DELEGATE BYRNES: I think it was
from 1920's or 30's to the 60's. I do not
have it with me, but I can get it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hargrove.
DELEGATE BYRNES: I have the an-
swer to Delegate Wagandt's question. It
was used a total of 97 times in all nineteen
states during the years 1956 to 1964, and
of the 97, 62 were initiated measures and
the balance were referred, but of that 62
I do not know how many were indirectly
initiated and how many directly initiated.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hargrove.
DELEGATE HARGROVE: Delegate
Byrnes, could you use this indirect initia-
tive to have the legislature enact consti-
tutional amendments?
DELEGATE BYRNES: Our answer to
that would be no. We would think the
people and the legislature would be con-


 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 719   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  August 16, 2024
Maryland State Archives