As various organizations adopt positions of support for, or
opposition to, the November call for a constitutional convention,
there appear to be two types of groups supporting the call:
1) the single agenda groups, and 2) the multiple agenda groups.
To counter these arguments, here are some talking points:
- Proponents of a single agenda issue, such as allowing
recall of government officials, term limits, or merit selection
of judges to the constitution are using the call to suggest
that a convention is the best way to accomplish that goal.
But we say, even though we support some of these issues:
- There is no guarantee that a specific issue will be
agreed on by the delegates and added to their rewrite;
instead the convention process would expose the entire
constitution to revision.
- The amendment process is more appropriate for change
and has been relatively successful under the 1970 constitution.
- The trade-offs that single issue groups might have
to make to gain support for their cause could result in
the loss of important provisions of the constitution.
- In responding to multiple agenda groups you should
not get caught up in arguing the merits of each proposed change
they are supporting, but should emphasize:
- The risks that the current political dysfunction in
state government will extend to the convention.
- The overall risks of opening the entire constitution
to revision in the convention process.
- The possible control of the convention by special interests.
- The lack of guarantee that convention delegates would
support the proposed changes of Con Con supporters.
- The inappropriateness of using the convention process
rather than the legislative process to address policy
issues. For example, the failure of the state to fund
public education adequately is a policy issue that has
to be resolved by the General Assembly appropriating more
dollars for schools. Constitutional provisions are not
self-executing and cannot replace the budget process.
- The feasibility of amending the constitution. (Since
1971, seventeen amendments have been proposed of which
ten have passed, while three of the seven defeated have
been identical proposals.)
- Amending the constitution also has the benefit of focusing
attention on one issue at a time.
|
