DELEGATE BYRNES: Mr. Chairman,
I think this is one answer to the problem
that we may have created.
Time will tell, by our apparent judgment
to create single-member districts.
There is a need for the development of
sound political authority with metropolitan
regional perspective in this state.
The day is far away when regional gov-
ernments will be accepted by the people.
This is assuming their value as a solution
to this growing problem.
It is entirely possible that regional gov-
ernment will never be established, and that
at best we will be forced to suffer a welter
of authorities, commissions and the like,
with different metropolitan responsibilities.
Maryland is a small state, Mr. Chairman,
and the population in the metropolitan re-
gion, already forms a great area of the
state.
Maryland is also uniquely situated geo-
graphically. The day will soon be upon us
when a great portion of Maryland is a
small portion of the Eastern megalopolis.
In short, many of Maryland's regional
inter-governmental relations and problems
lend themselves to state level solutions. It
is possible some day that the Senate will
assume a limited or full role as the legis-
lature responsible for regional and inter-
governmental problem-solving, making nec-
essary new additional layers of govern-
ment or authorities of taxing power.
To add thrust to this movement, this
amendment is offered. It would at least
place in our state legislature persons who
by political necessity must adopt a regional
metropolitan perspective, leaving the House
of Delegates to continue the needed county,
city, local perspective in state problem-
solving.
It would also begin the long educational
process by which the people of this state
will come to appreciate that the problems
of our day have torn asunder the geo-
political fabric we have known for so long,
and that it must be rewoven.
This convention must look to this prob-
lem of intergovernmental relations, and
regional development patterns, and it must
take some positive steps in response to
them.
This amendment, Mr. Chairman, is a
very tiny step now that will permit great
strides at some future time.
Thank you. |
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition?
Delegate Gallagher?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Mr. Chair-
man and ladies and gentlemen, I believe
that the subject matter of this amendment
really belongs more properly in Section
3.02, which has not as yet been reported
upon by the Committee on the Legislative
Branch. This really addresses itself to the
question of redistricting, and I would sug-
gest to Delegate Byrnes that he consider
withdrawing the amendment and offering
it at the time we come to Section 302, re-
districting, where it can be debated more
intelligently. I ask if he would consider
that.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Byrnes?
DELEGATE BYRNES: I do.
THE CHAIRMAN: Amendment No. 14
is withdrawn?
DELEGATE BYRNES: The amendment
is withdrawn.
THE CHAIRMAN: Amendment No. 14
is withdrawn.
The Chair requests that all delegates re-
main in the chamber. I hope that we can
adjourn in a very few minutes, but it is
imperative that all delegates remain in the
chamber.
Is there any further amendment to Sec-
tion 3.04? If not, we will move to section
3.05.
The Chair intends to recognize Delegate
Hopkins for presentation of the minority
report, and then immediately recognize
Delegate Powers so that the Committee
may rise.
The Chair recognizes Delegate Hopkins.
DELEGATE HOPKINS: Do you mean
for me to explain this or merely present it?
THE CHAIRMAN: You do not have to
do anything for the moment. You have the
floor. Before recognizing the Chairman of
the Committee on Calendar and Agenda,
the Chair feels impelled to call to the at-
tention of the delegates that we have spent
a great deal of time today in debate and in
fruitful debate, but we have fallen into
the habit of not violating, but not observ-
ing the true spirit of the rule, that in the
Committee of the Whole a delegate may
speak more than once.
There have been delegates who have |
