Constitutional Convention Ballot Question
Next Tuesday might be the pivotal Presidential election, but an item on the ballot this year may have far more ranging impact on who is president for residents in Connecticut. Up for vote is the question on forming a Constitutional Convention, meaning that the state constitution could be amended to allow for referendum issues to be placed on the ballot by voter initiatives. Currently the constitution of Connecticut can be amended, but by a 2/3 vote of the state legislature.
In the last Constitution Convention was 40 years ago, but the constitution has been amended 30 times since 1965 without a convention. Ironically the last amendment was a requirement that voters be asked every 20 years if they wanted another constitutional convention. So what’s the big deal?
There are groups pushing for it and opposing it, which at best can be labeled special interests. On the pro side, you have the anti-tax groups and the “holier than thou” nuttery that want to define life by whatever doctrine they find convenient. On the opposed side you have the usual assortment of groups that prefer the status quo legislate by lobbyist way of doing things. The common thing between both camps is that they both strongly believe that special interest groups representing rabid issues would end up in charge of the convention and alternatively, either would destroy man kind, Connecticut and any rights that have could be threatened by the pitchfork and torch crowd, or patriotically reverse whatever dastardly doing some court has decided.
Having a convention would basically enable a referendum to be placed on a ballot subject to petitioners successfully meeting some threshold of support. This would be similar to California, and it’s crazy penchant for revisiting the same issues over and over again because no one is happy with the status quo. The only special interest that would be in charge of the Convention would be the state legislature because they get to set the criteria for who is a member of the convention. The legislature would also determine when the convention is to meet, its rules and the subjects to be discussed. That alone should scare anyone thinking that you’d get some constitutional expertise in the caliber of delegates, but I digress.
Assuming that the voters of Connecticut say yes to the convention, and that the delegates vote to amend the Constitution and everything is hunky dory, the first proposed amendment and every proposal thereafter would still require a majority vote from we the public voters before any change to the constitution would be allowed to take place, at least according to Article 13 of the Connecticut State Constitution.
In today’s Courant, a poll was taken, testing the waters of where Connecticut voters are on the issue:
A new poll suggests that voter alienation is prompting support for proposed revisions to the Connecticut Constitution, not opposition to gay marriage.
Voters favor amending the constitution to allow citizen ballot initiatives, but they reject the anti-gay-marriage sentiments prominent in calls for a constitutional convention.
The poll found that 50 percent of voters support a convention to amend the state constitution and 39 percent are opposed. But 55 percent oppose a constitutional ban on gay marriage.
Instead, the poll found a correlation between a poor opinion of the General Assembly and support for the ability of citizens to legislate by petition and referendum.
“The constitutional convention question appears to be a referendum on the performance of the General Assembly,” said Christine Kraus, who directed the poll.
So there you have it, the incongruous alignment of issues that will motivate voters on this issue. Strangely, no mention of property tax reform, which is the biggest challenge facing Connecticut’s economic welfare.
source: Courant, Poll: Voter Alienation Fuels Backing For Constitutional Convention, By MARK PAZNIOKAS , October 30, 2008
