|
1
|
which requires consideration of the budget first; but do
|
|
2
|
you mean what it seems to imply, namely that the legislatur
|
|
3
|
can amend upwards as well, as reduce the Governor's budget?
|
|
4
|
MR. LAUBER: Yes. I think it would be beneficial
|
|
5
|
to have a provision that any increases in the budget be
|
|
6
|
separately stated and subject to independent veto by the
|
|
7.
|
Governor, but I would see nothing wrong with this.
|
|
8
|
For example, suppose the Governor put in a budget
|
|
9
|
and the legislature wanted to increase State aid for
|
|
10
|
education and they were willing to give up the highway
|
|
11
|
program to do it. I see nothing wrong with them cutting
|
|
12
|
out the highway program and increasing the State aid to
|
|
13
|
education, passing a law implement.
|
|
14
|
One other technical thing, and I may not have all
|
|
15
|
my facts straight on this; I understand that money is
|
|
16
|
carried in the budget in Maryland even for special bills.
|
|
17
|
In other words, if a special bill is passed incurring an
|
|
18
|
expenditure that the appropriation is not usually in the
|
|
19
|
bill because of the requirement that the bill must also
|
|
20
|
carry a revenue to be carried into effect. In my days of
|
|
21
|
coordinating legislation for the New York Budget Office, I
|
