A new constitutional convention for state?

Public sentiment in California favors drastic government reform, and many believe that reform starts with the state constitution. Recently a Field poll showed 51 percent of Californians believe “fundamental changes” need to be made to the Golden State’s constitution. And a majority of voters think that a constitutional convention is the way to do it.

The timing of the poll is perfect as Repair California, the group championing the convention, plans next week to submit language for a November 2010 ballot initiative calling for a constitutional convention focused on governance issues to be held in 2011.

A constitutional convention no doubt sounds sexy, especially when many frustrated voters think that it is California’s last hope. But why exactly do we need a constitutional convention and what exactly would it aim to fix?

Would it aim to fix Proposition 13, landmark legislation that protects taxpayers in California? Would it change the voting requirements in the State Assembly and Senate that require a two-thirds majority to pass a budget? Would it overturn term limits, impose a state spending cap, or impact initiative and referendum rules? The answer at this point is yes, and no. Repair California told us Proposition 13 likely would be off the table, but the other issues would be up for debate.

When and if a constitutional convention addressed some of the aforementioned issues though, we suspect California voters would no longer be so keen on such a convention. Last week’s poll confirms our suspicion. When it comes to Prop 13, the two-thirds majority vote budget rule, and term limits, voters say “hands off.” The poll found that majorities support all three of the current restrictions and wouldn’t want a convention to change those.
59 percent of poll respondents also agreed that a constitutional convention should not address social issues. And a state spending cap is only supported by a thin 48 to 45 percent margin.

Repair California says that their proposal for a ballot initiative restricts delegates from addressing tax increases and social issues, restrictions which they claim would protect Prop 13 and keep the convention focused on pertinent governance issues instead of more divisive social concerns. Taking tax increases and social issues off the table might appease some concerned citizens (and special interests) but it might also hamstring the convention. And we are not convinced that all of Prop 13’s provisions would be completely safe.

It does seem like Californians want a “limited” constitutional convention though, and Repair California plans to deliver it. The Bay Area Council has committed two million dollars in funding to the group to help launch the initiative which they say is aimed at fixing California operation governance issues such as: limiting the influence of special interests; reducing waste and bureaucracy; changing the power dynamic between state and local government; and rethinking the initiative and referendum processes.

We will wait to reserve final judgment on the initiative until its text is released, but there are a few things the initiative should ensure, and good reason to be skeptical about the whole idea. At a minimum it should protect Prop 13 and the two-thirds budget rule. Californians do not want higher property taxes nor do they want a one party legislature. When and if a constitutional convention is created, whatever comes out of the convention will have to be voted on again by the public.

It is unfortunate that the state has come to the point that a constitutional convention is even being discussed. If the politicians in Sacramento were doing their jobs, delegates wouldn’t have to be hired to do their jobs for them.