|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ch. 972
|
|
|
|
|
3644
|
|
|
|
|
|
LAWS OF MARYLAND
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annotated Code of Maryland
(1975 Replacement Volume and 1976 Supplement)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BY adding to
Article 77 — Public Education
Section 90
Annotated Code of Maryland
(1975 Replacement Volume and 1976 Supplement)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BY repealing and reenacting, with amendments,
Article - Transportation
Section 16.111.1(a)
Annotated Code of Maryland
(As enacted by Chapter ____ of the Acts of the
General Assembly of 1977)
Preamble
WHEREAS, The Chairmen of the Senate Budget and
Taxation Committee and the House Appropriations Committee
recommended in July 1976 that the cost benefit analysis
of the driver education program be evaluated, and
WHEREAS. The Legislative Policy Committee, in an
effort to urge legislative review of State programs and
the fiscal support of these programs, recommended 13
programs for review by the various Senate and House
Committee during the 1977 Session, and
WHEREAS, The House Committee on Ways and Means was
asked to review the driver education program for possible
sunset legislation, and
WHEREAS, The House Committee on Ways and Means
received in excess of 15 hours of public testimony and
voluminous correspondence on the driver education program
in Maryland, and
WHEREAS, No statistical evidence was presented to
support or deny the claims that the driver education
program benefited all the citizens of Maryland, was a
deterrent to increased highway accidents, or provided
safety and economic benefits as a result of drivers
completing this program, and
WHEREAS, The costs of the driver education program
differed substantially among the public schools and
between the public schools and the professional schools,
and
WHEREAS, The citizen input into the public hearings
demonstrated a high level of support for the continuation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
