tunity for the consideration of those bills
having less priority. The comparatively
few controversial bills must consume
most of the session-time and the others
are shelved for the next session, if ever.
CATEGORY "0"
This category represents those cases
where no amendments of any type were
made to a bill by the second house, and
the original bill remained intact to the
final punctuation mark.
Example: This category is demon-
strated by House Bill 302. The bill,
introduced by the speaker, concerned
certain payments to be made to widows
of judges. Referred to the Committee
on Finance, 30 the bill had a labored trip
through the House. On third reading
it had a majority of the votes in the
House, 59 to 43, ai but the Maryland
Constitution requires that bills must be
passed by a majority of the whole num-
ber of members elected.12 In this case the
bill required seventy-two "aye" votes. A
motion was made to reconsider the vote
by which House Bill 302 failed to receive
a constitutional majority.13 The motion
was made a special order of the day,14
and finally carried by a vote of 56 to
41.15 The bill then passed the House on
third reading 94 to 6.16 In the Senate
the bill was referred to the Finance
Committee.17 Favorably reported out of
this Committee, 18 it went to the floor
of the Senate for third reading. The
bill was passed without change by the
Senate 28 to I.19
10 1 md. H. del. jour. 201 (1965).
11 md. H. del. jour. 1307 (1964).
12 md. const, art. IV, sec. 28.
13 2 md. H. del. jour. 1499 ( 1965).
14 Id. at 14.
15 Id. at 1548.
16 Id. at 1565.
17 2 md. S. jour. 1085 (1965).
18 Id. at 1552.
19 Id. at 1620.
|
CATEGORY "1"
This category represents those cases
where the textual changes which were
made by the second house were either
a correction of spelling or punctuation,20
or a semantic difference of opinion.21
Example: This category is demon-
strated by Senate Bill 10. The bill,
introduced by the president of the Senate
for the Legislative Council concerned
home rule for code counties. Referred
to the Committee on Judicial Proceed-
ings,22 the bill came out of the Commit-
tee in amended form. It passed the
Senate 29 to 2,23 and was then sent to
the House where the Committee on the
Judiciary amended the bill24 by strik-
ing the words "already is scheduled to"
and inserting the words "at the General
Election." The bill then passed the
House.25 This was merely a semantic
change and the Senate concurred in
it unanimously.26
CATEGORY "2"
This category represents those cases
where the bill was changed moderately
by an amendment which constituted a
reconstruction of the original bill, rather
than the formation of a new bill.
Example: See example to category
"3."
20 This only applies where the change in
punctuation did not result in a change in
meaning. Sometimes the mere addition or de-
letion of a comma can affect the statutory
interpretation.
21 Note that this involves a substitution of
different words describing the same thought.
Here the change was one of style, not simili-
tude.
22 1 md. S. jour. 12 (1965).
23 Id. at 245.
24 1 md. H. del. jour. 838 (1965).
25 Id. at 1062.
26 1 md. S. jour. 700 (1965).
119
|
