THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: I would like to
yield three minutes to Delegate Hutchinson.
DELEGATE HUTCHINSON: Mr.
Chairman, if the people of this convention
and people of the State of Maryland be-
lieve at all in popular sovereignty, it seems
to me we should include within the con-
stitution a proposal for initiative. It seems
to me we must speak in favor of public
involvement and the initiative would en-
courage public involvement. If this is what
we are looking for, then initiative is the
answer.
Also the initiative has never been a sub-
stitute for legislation. Instead it is a com-
plement to it. It is not to restrict the legis-
lature from acting, it only says we want
you to act in this way, and we hope you
do it. If you do not, we will move on and
take care of it ourselves. This is all the
initiative does. It does give the legislature
the opportunity to act on a piece of legisla-
tion. This is the reason I am in favor of
including the initiative in the constitution.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: I would like to
yield to Delegate Cardin.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: Mr. Chairman,
fellow delegates, I am sorry I must oppose
Delegate Byrnes who worked admirably on
the subcommittee on referendum and initia-
tive. However, I feel that indirect initia-
tive actually is a total opposition of the
philosophy which we held. We believe the
people should reserve the right to refer-
endum, we did not mean for them to begin
legislating in 1968. We have not ever had
this right in the state. It has not been seen
fit earlier to introduce it; this is no time
to begin.
I would like to suggest several pit-falls
in this procedure. First the sponsors who,
as you know, need not be pinpointed or
especially singled out, can dictate to the
legislature how, what, and when to legis-
late. Certainly the new constitution does
not purport to do this or should not do
this. We have now decided upon a new
stream-lined legislature and it would be
more than presumptuous, it would be in-
sulting to tell them that the people have
the right to tell them how, when, and why
to legislate. This is what indirect initiative
would do.
I would like to bring to your attention |
also several states who have it, but who
have not had, for example, any initiative
in the past ten to fifteen years. Since 1958
Maine has had nothing initiated on the
ballot. Nevada has had two measures,
which were rejected.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: I would like to
yield five minutes to Delegate Schloeder.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Schloeder.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Thank you.
I do not think I will take the full time. I
think Delegate Byrnes has very ably
summed up both in his original presenta-
tion and question and answer period the
case for initiative.
I would like to say a desire to pass in-
itiative is no reflection on the present legis-
lature or any legislature that may sit in
the near future.
But it seems to me here in this Conven-
tion we are wrestling in all our delibera-
tions with a very fundamental question. We
are trying in some way on the one hand
to have an efficient governmental structure
and on the other hand we are trying to
have democratic participation in that gov-
ernmental structure.
We got a long way away from the origi-
nal concept of democratic participation
that existed in Athens and during the early
Teutonic tribes. I do not suggest we can
ever go back to that. But I would suggest
that in our present complex, highly indus-
trialized society, that as the state legisla-
ture becomes smaller, as it becomes more
elite, as it becomes less representative of
the people, that the people must reserve
to themselves some options, that they must
reserve to themselves the opportunity to
initiate legislation.
I think that we have a real fear in this
country of a growing alienation on the part
of our society. It seems to me that any
democratic society or any democratic politi-
cal structure is going to die if the people
become alienated from that power struc-
ture or from that establishment. I know
there are a lot of specific arguments
against indirect initiative. One of the argu-
ments is that a lot of regressive legislation
is initiated. I would suggest that most of
the examples, the example of California's
fair housing, was direct initiative and not
indirect initiative.
I would also say there is going to be in
this Chamber before the week is out, I |
