California's Constitution
| Wed May. 20, 2009 9:33 PM PDT
California is broken. So what's next?
As the notion of California as ungovernable grows stronger than ever, Mr. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, has expressed support for a
convention to address such things as the state’s arcane budget requirements and its process for proliferate ballot initiatives, both of which necessitated Tuesday’s statewide vote on budget matters approved months ago by state lawmakers.
“There could not be more of a tipping point,” said Jim Wunderman, chief executive of the Bay Area Council, a business group that moved forward on Wednesday with plans to push for a constitutional convention. “We think the interest is going to grow by orders of magnitude now.”
I'm actually in favor of this idea, even though it would almost certainly turn into a circus of unparalleled proportions. Latter day Madisons and Hamiltons are thin on the ground here in the Golden State.
But — just to remind everyone: in order to even hold a constitutional convention, it has to be put on the ballot and approved by a majority of the electorate. And how does the question get put on the ballot? It has to be approved by two-thirds of the legislature. But this is the problem we're trying to solve in the first place: to pass a budget or raise taxes takes a two-thirds vote of the legislature, and Republicans have enough votes to stop that from happening. Votes that they use regularly. So why wouldn't they also stand in the way of a constitutional convention whose main purpose would almost certainly be to remove the two-thirds requirements for passing a budget and raising taxes?
Now, maybe sheer desperation would get a few of them on board. Maybe some kind of backroom deal could be arranged. Who knows? But one way or another, you have to get two-thirds of the legislature to agree to it. That's a problem we obviously haven't solved yet.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
this just isn't true
Submitted by dday (not verified) on Wed May. 20, 2009 10:22 PM PDT.
While that is the constitutional rule as it stands right now, like any other damn thing in the CA constitution that's easily changed. You can gather signatures to change the Constitution to make a Constitutional convention allowable by a vote of the people, and then put it on the ballot. You could even do that in the same election. And if the legislature fails to move forward on this, that's exactly what the Bay Area Council is planning to do. Here's the relevant section in the BAC's FAQ:
»Is there another process to call a California Constitutional Convention? Our legal research indicates that by ballot initiative, a majority of the voters can approve an amendment to the current Constitution that would allow the voters to bypass the legislature and directly call a Constitutional Convention. This voter-driven Convention would have the same powers as one created by the legislature, and the product of the Convention would still be subject to majority approval by the voters to take effect. It is worth noting that one of the fundamental statements of the California Constitution is: "All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require." »Could the amendment allowing voters to call a California Constitutional Convention and the actual call be on the same ballot? Yes. According to our legal counsel, the amendment to allow the voters to directly call a Constitutional Convention and an immediate call for a constitutional convention can be on the same ballot. For example, “Proposition 1” would amend the Constitution to allow voters to call a Convention and “Proposition 2” would ask voters if the Convention should be called now. Article 2, section 10 (A) of the Constitution states “An initiative statute or referendum approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect the day after the election, unless the measure provides otherwise.” So no, you don't have to get 2/3 of the legislature to agree to it. This is California, we've amended the Constitution 500 times. If there's anything we know how to do, it's that.
Beat me to it
Submitted by daCascadian (not verified) on Wed May. 20, 2009 11:01 PM PDT.
I was going to suggest that there could be a way to work around the 2/3rds angle by doing a ballot initiative to change the appropriate section of the Constitution.
So good luck with it, "We the people..." shall be watching.
Oh and think about Heather Brooke on those days when success seems really, really improbable.
"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things." - Niccoló Machiavelli (The Prince, 1532)
The Economist newspaper last week .....
Submitted by Ed Tracey on Thu May. 21, 2009 12:41 PM PDT.
.... proposed a convention as well.
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id...
We should pay attention to that man behind the curtain.
I'd be more gung-ho about a
Submitted by Surfer Dude (not verified) on Wed May. 20, 2009 11:08 PM PDT.
I'd be more gung-ho about a Convention if I didn't believer, for good reason, that it would be a circus.
Part of me thinks we should just start over. Revert to the 1849 Constitution, only updating the really egregious stuff - like suffrage.
http://www.sos.ca.gov/archives/level3_const1849txt.html
Sure it would be inadequate, but I bet it would work better than what we have now. And it would avoid the complete blank slate, start out from scratch circus that I fear.
I'd say the first step would
Submitted by DougMN (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 3:01 AM PDT.
I'd say the first step would be to redistrict and get some (all?) of these super - safe republican districts with their loony reps/sens to be more competitive districts. Of course, that would require some of the super-safe dem districts to not be so super safe, so that's not too likely...
Yes
Submitted by Art Eclectic on Thu May. 21, 2009 7:06 AM PDT.
I still can't believe that the proposition to redistrict the state failed. What always amazes me about human behavior is that voters will whine and complain about corrupt politicians and yet still keep voting for incumbents and derailing all attempts at leveling the playing field.
The only answer I come up with is that Karl Rove is right, people are stupid sheep and ripe pickings for manipulation.
Thing is, the super-safe
Submitted by Crissa (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 8:05 PM PDT.
Thing is, the super-safe dems aren't anywhere near the looney repubs.
They managed to unseat our dem state rep and senator - luckily, they fught and won in new districts. But it really peeved me to be voting with people nowhere near and not sharing the same needs.
Won't you get a really crazy constitution that way?
Submitted by bcamarda (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 3:59 AM PDT.
...though I suppose you can argue that it couldn't be much worse than it is now.
But I'm envisioning a proposed constitution packed with right-wing craziness, flat-taxes, gold standards, sovereignty, radical definitions of gun rights, etc., etc. (not to mention split electoral votes with or without the rest of the country going along). Then the citizens have no choice but to reject it, and you're right back where you started.
I can easily see the right-wing populists and old-time Bircher descendants who are fascinated by the in the ins-and-outs of constitutions as playing a much more active and powerful role than either the traditional business interests or the left.
If you DO somehow get a new constitution that limits the right of referendum, I can't imagine that getting passed.
Kevin, is your take on "conditions on the ground" different?
That's the default worry ...
Submitted by al-Fubar (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 6:04 AM PDT.
Which - till now - has made the convention approach unthinkable. But we are in such a deep jam now that constitution-writing isn't just for crackpots any more. To paraphrase Churchill, the premise is trusting the people of California to do the right thing, now that we have exhausted all other possibilities.
Would it be possible somehow
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 5:04 AM PDT.
Would it be possible somehow to use Article 4 Section 4 of the constitution (the one about a "republican form of government") to argue that at some point the California government doesn't work & needs to be overhauled by the feds?
Not as bad as Alabama's
Submitted by Randy Paul on Thu May. 21, 2009 6:02 AM PDT.
Alabama's constitution has 798 amendments and counting.
Prop 13
Submitted by Art Eclectic on Thu May. 21, 2009 7:09 AM PDT.
I've been pondering the Prop 13 mess and thinking that a fair solution might be to set up property taxes on a flat rate based on sq footage, rather than purchase price.
If you went with something like $2.50 a sq foot -- non changeable, so that the CA government can't just roll in and help themselves when they overspend -- I think that would probably solve the problem and keep property taxes close to a sane level for most people. It would also discourage building larger and larger houses that need to be heated and cooled.
If the solution was somewhere along those lines, I could get on board with repealing Prop 13.
2/3 requirement
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 7:55 AM PDT.
didn't the 2/3 requirement get passed by prop 13 with a simple majority vote of citizens? couldn't we simply do the opposite?
Could Prop 13 be repealed?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 11:38 PM PDT.
Well, the "simple majority" was 65% in favor of Prop 13. I guess that's just shy of 2/3rds, but small comfort.
In theory, it's possible to just put a "Repeal Prop 13" measure on the ballot if you can get the signature for it, but in practice, no one has ever attempted it because they know it would fail. In March of 2004, there was a measure on the ballot that would have lowered the 2/3rds threshold to 55% of legislators in order to pass a budget. 66% of voters shot it down.
I dunno. People can see the ill effects of Prop 13, but to repeal or modify it, they'd have to be convinced first that things wouldn't go back to the bad old days of the '70s, when inflation and property taxes were just killing a lot of people's budgets. I don't know how many people still remember those days.
a Raw Deal
Submitted by tpx on Thu May. 21, 2009 8:10 AM PDT.
During these times of leadership incompetence and deliberate wrecking, it is difficult to imagine a new constitution written with the help of an Austrian body builder is going to be do anything except make life worse for the bottom 80% of Californians. Americans should prepare themselves for a Raw Deal.
Forcing Change
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 9:06 AM PDT.
If anything is going to happen, it will require putting the Republicans on the hot seat as obstructionists. And that hot seat has to be in the media spotlight. Democrats will have to openly, directly and in a factual manner make the case for reform to the voting public. They will have to tie the reform message to the everyday lives of Californians. And they will have to directly confront the Republicans and expose their tactics to the light of day.
Never happen. Too many Dems have too much invested in the current process.
I think laying our current
Submitted by Art Eclectic on Thu May. 21, 2009 12:15 PM PDT.
I think laying our current problems at the feet of Republicans is a little untruthful. The Dems in the legislature are just as responsible for the failure to live within their means - they've protected outrageous union contracts, set up cronies in well paying government funded jobs and generally been pretty darn easy with the taxpayers money.
Quite frankly, I'm on the side of Reps when it comes to California's out of control spending. When 1 out of every 5 residents of Los Angeles County is on some kind of public support - we have a problem. It just isn't sustainable.
Stop baby sitting the corruption
Submitted by daCascadian (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 12:52 PM PDT.
Art Eclectic >"...When 1 out of every 5 residents of Los Angeles County is on some kind of public support - we have a problem. It just isn't sustainable."
And what percentage of the businesses in Los Angeles County receive some sort of public support ?
You know, tax breaks like complete property tax forgiveness, subsidies through the California tax code (and the federal tax code), allowance for pollution generation behavior, land use exemptions etc. If you want the playing field to be level it must be level for ALL parties, not slanted towards one favored group.
You want the holy almighty "market" to work ? Then NO EXTERNALITIES anywhere PERIOD. Quit supporting cheating with the numbers.
“Adam Smith’s invisible hand -- the idea that free markets lead to efficiency as if guided by unseen forces -- is invisible, at least in part, because it is not there...” - Joseph Stiglitz
I absolutely and completely
Submitted by Art Eclectic on Thu May. 21, 2009 2:24 PM PDT.
I absolutely and completely agree. I don't know about you, but I'm to the point where I feel like everyone is getting a free ride except me.
Bigger sacrifices might help.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 1:32 PM PDT.
Isn`t the situtation such a mess that the government would actually become more effective if a lot more republicans were voted into office? Eventually they would have a two thirds majority that could agree among themselfs and vote for a only moderately insane budget right? And its not like the republicans are gonna sacrifice half an inch of their "power" for the good of the state.
Anyway, I cant help you, to busy reading about the political gridlock in Ukraine. Such a small country compared to California.
Bigger sacrifices might help.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 1:32 PM PDT.
Isn`t the situation such a mess that the government would actually become more effective if a lot more republicans were voted into office? Eventually they would have a two thirds majority that could agree among themselfs and vote for a only moderately insane budget right? And its not like the republicans are gonna sacrifice half an inch of their "power" for the good of the state.
Anyway, I cant help you, to busy reading about the political gridlock in Ukraine. Such a small country compared to California.
There is no solution without growing up
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 5:02 PM PDT.
California democrats and republicans equally share the economic disaster my State is facing. In other words we are part of the problems and all part of the solution. That means as a first step to stop always blaming the other side and to start looking at ourselves.
On the one hand we can't raise taxes and on the other hand we can't say no to public spending. The solution todate has been debt.
Moving toward a solution implies higher taxes, reforming our liability system, reforming our regulatory system and reduced public spending. We could of course do nothing but meddle about and end up with a South American type
economy with chronic unemployement and huge systemic failures and still
survive and life will still go on.
Every Year
Submitted by Clint (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 7:56 PM PDT.
Every year I have the same proposal. We need a constitutional amendment that if in a legislator or Governor's term the budget is not passed on time they are ineligible to be elected to a state office ever again. No retiring to get out of it. You are just done.
No need for action.
Submitted by Luther on Thu May. 21, 2009 9:00 PM PDT.
No need for action. Profligacy is always self-limiting.
California's economy seems to become more Mexico-like all the time. I just don't get it. Not enough immigration and H-1Bs to add new entrepreneurship and vigor I suppose.
Emperor Maximilian was also
Submitted by tpx on Fri May. 22, 2009 5:57 PM PDT.
Emperor Maximilian was also from Austria.
Restart California
Submitted by Media Desk (not verified) on Thu May. 28, 2009 12:43 PM PDT.
Californians are angry! We believe California’s system of government is fundamentally broken. Our prisons overflow, our water system teeters on collapse, our once proud schools are criminally poor, our financing system is bankrupt, our democracy produces ideologically-extreme legislators that can pass neither budget nor reforms, and we have no recourse in the system to right these wrongs. It's time to get involved http://pfx.me/eJ
Corrections on the California Constituitonal Convention
Submitted by Adrian Covert (not verified) on Thu Jun. 11, 2009 2:53 PM PDT.
A 2/3 vote of the legislature is not the only way to put a Constitutional Convention before the voters of California.
The other way you do it is by a two-part ballot measure.
Voters will see two questions on the ballot. The first will be a vote to amend the current state constitution to allow voters to call for a Constitutional Convention directly. The second will be a vote on whether or not to call a convention should the previous initiative pass. A similar two-party initiative was used in 2003 to A.) Recall Governor Gray Davis, and B.) Elect Schwarzennegger should that recall succeed.
This precisely the strategy that is being pursued by the official campaign to call a State Constitutional Convention. Learn more at www.repaircalifornia.org
NOTHING LIKE THE ECONOMY TO LIGHT A FIRE UNDER OUR ASSES!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat Jul. 25, 2009 9:05 AM PDT.
We DO have a crisis in California government that needs to be addressed, NOW!
Our constitution will only pass a budget by a 2/3 vote, which actually gives controlling interest to the minority faction in the legislature, because it can hold the budget hostage until it gets what it wants. Second, because of term limits, there is no real leadership on either side of the isle. Where's John Burton? Willie Brown? Those guys used to make closed-door compromises in late night "sessions" in cigar smoke filled rooms. Third, because of our initiative process, the small percentage of citizens who actually vote make most of the policies which control most of the money through elections. The whole legislative process is so messed up right now that we need a convention to create a new constitution that makes sense for the 8th largest economy in today's world! Short of a new constitution, I think the best coarse is to make all necessary cuts to REALLY balance the budget - not do what they have done by shifting money around, and borrowing from local communities. I'd rather they raise taxes, myself, but if that's not possible, then cut, let people move in with family members, and let the suffering begin. The state will quickly become "dumber and sicker" as one analyst put it. Only then will people realize that new funs are needed to keep this state viable. One legislator said in the Times today, "If you can't make the best possible deal, then make the best deal possible." Maybe that's what they did, under the circumstances, but BIG change is needed to our constitution. What can we do?
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
