|
Amendment A will be Amendment No. 1.
The Clerk will read the amendment.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 1
to Committee Recommendation LB-2 by
Delegate Byrnes: On page 1 section 3.02,
Legislative Districts, after line 20 insert
the following:
"To the extent practicable, Senate dis-
trict boundaries shall cross county or Bal-
timore City political boundaries so as to
contain delegate districts from different
counties."
THE CHAIRMAN: The amendment is
offered by Delegate Byrnes. Is there a sec-
ond?
Is there a second to Amendment No. 1?
(There was no response.)
The Chair has not heard a second.
DELEGATE BUZZELL: I second the
amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Buzzell sec-
onded the amendment. The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Byrnes to speak to the
amendment.
DELEGATE BYRNES: Mr. Chairman,
I think this is just a matter which should
be presented to this house for considera-
tion.
I was hoping that the Legislative Branch
Committee could have given it more full
consideration, than I think it was able to do
in the time that it had.
The thrust of it is very simple: that we
think to some extent we should provide a
spur in the General Assembly, to build in
a spur in the General Assembly to have
them recognize the responsibility in re-
gional metropolitan problems.
We have established and the Committee
of the Whole has agreed the single member
district will be the order of the day and I
think that although it has value in that
many people are concerned, parochialism
will result. However, we would also have at
least one house remaining after this
amendment were adopted which would rep-
resent the districts and presumably
county-wide interests.
Now, what bothers me is that we do not
have, built into the General Assembly at-
mosphere, if you will, metropolitanism or
regionalism, and this is a golden oppor-
tunity to provide it.
We think that this amendment, by re-
quiring, wherever it is possible to do so,
|
that senate district boundaries, not house
but merely senate district boundaries cross
county lines. We think this would provide
in the future representatives in the Senate
of regional metropolitan districts. We think
that this would accomplish everyone's ob-
jective.
In the House you would have the single
member district and county-wide a district
represented. In the Senate you would have
a metropolitan or regional interest repre-
sented.
I would point out to the Committee that
the Committee of the Whole has adopted
by a very substantial majority the recom-
mendation of the Local Government Com-
mittee that the General Assembly be per-
mitted to move in the area of regionalism,
but I think that they have had this au-
thority for a number of years, and I think
it is only natural that they do not respond
to these problems because they themselves
do not represent the interests where those
problems are as an area. We, therefore,
suggest this is a very practical and simple
device that would accomplish this objective.
That is all I have to say, Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any ques-
tions of the minority spokesman?
Delegate Schloeder.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Yes, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Let the Chair make
this observation. The Chair is disposed to
restrict questions to the delegates and to
those offering amendments to the time al-
lotted for that purpose.
There will be a question period now for
the sponsor of this amendment. The ques-
tion period for this amendment is now, not
later.
Delegate Schloeder.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Delegate
Byrnes, if this body were to decide that
multi-member districts would be retained
in the Constitution, would this in any way
alter your attitude toward this amend-
ment?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: I would say no,
because presumably the multi-member dis-
tricts, whether they be three, two, or one,
would be established, according to the Leg-
islative Branch Committee recommendation,
within the local subdivisions that we now
know and this of course is the problem
that this amendment is directed to.
|
