clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 380   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
380 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Nov. 3]
official examination or verification of the
statistics.
Another good reason for the Finance and
Taxation Committee's recommendation, of
an audit is that it permits the General
Assembly to oversee the mechanics of opera-
tion and to appraise the results and per-
formances. The citizens of Maryland are
entitled to know the quality as well as the
quantity of her expenditures. The audit
encompassed in Maryland's new constitu-
tion makes possible legislative scrutiny and
the ideal system of checks and balances,
while at the same time, it maintains a dis-
tinct separation of governmental powers.
Finally in the years to come, future gen-
erations will treasure their opportunity to
know if money appropriated is spent as
intended, if the State gets the best goods
and services for its money, if all state
departments follow good accounting sys-
tems, if there are areas of waste rather
than economy, and if there is a need
for greater efficiency.
We thank you for this opportunity af-
forded us to support this recommendation.
We sincerely hope you will find it possible
to adopt it. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion? Delegate Adkins.
DELEGATE ADKINS: I should like to
ask the Chairman of the Committee for
assurance that the term post-audit is a
sufficiently specific word of art so that
under the guise of the enabling legislation
creating the post-auditor it would not be
possible for the legislative officer to engage
in any manner in the budget-making proc-
ess heretofore normally reserved for the
chief executive. This is not in my opinion
clear in the language. Unless I am assured
that the term post-audit is a specific word
of art, nor indeed do I find it commented
upon where I think it quite properly
should—
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Adkins, I
might say to you if you are asking a ques-
tion, your time is charged against Delegate
Sherbow if he responds but if you debate
the time will be charged against you.
DELEGATE ADKINS: I will consider
it debate but I would like to get assurance
on this point.
THE CHAIRMAN: This is the Commit-
tee of the Whole. You may proceed.
DELEGATE ADKINS: I should like to
be assured. In short, while I am completely
in favor of legislative post-audit responsi-
bilities, I should like to be assured that the
term post-audit is not a Trojan horse for
the interposition of legislative responsibility
in the area of the budget-making process.
With that assurance, I shall be prepared to
vote for the proposal as amended.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recognizes
Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Delegate Ad-
kins, the term post-audit is as far as I
know a word that has been used as a word
of art not only by the Maryland Legislative
Council but elsewhere in other statutes. In
order to make doubly clear the point which
you are raising, we will, with the permis-
sion of whoever will have the authority to
give that permission, add a memorandum
to our commentary in which we point out
that we are speaking of post-audit as we
understand it and the very essence of what
we propose is that it not impinge on the
functions of the executive. Your under-
standing is correct. It relates only to post-
audit and has nothing to do with the execu-
tive function.
THE CHAIRMAN: I take it, to express
it another way, you are saying it has to do
with audit of the expenditure after the ex-
penditure and not before?
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Exactly.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
debate? Delegate Fornos.
DELEGATE FORNOS: Would the
Chairman of State Finance and Taxation
yield for a question?
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Certainly.
DELEGATE FORNOS: Do you mean
when in line 9 you say "a person appointed
by the General Assembly" that you are pre-
cluding the General Assembly from electing
such an auditor among themselves?
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Delegate For-
nos, when you say among themselves, if you
mean selecting somebody from their own
body, this, of course, is a matter that I
cannot —
DELEGATE FORNOS: By majority
vote of each House.
THE CHAIRMAN: I do not think your
question was on the microphone, Delegate
Fornos. Would you repeat it?
DELEGATE FORNOS: You mean selec-
tion of a state auditor through the means
of a majority vote of each house of the
General Assembly?


 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 380   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives