Besides electing a president, state and local legislators, and reps for education and Hawaiian affairs, an important item on your November ballot will be this question: “Shall there be a convention to propose a revision of or amendments to the Constitution?” Your vote will be either yes or no.
Before you choose which way to vote, you need to know what a Constitutional Convention, or Con Con, is and what it is not. There has been a good deal of discussion in local media, but most of it has been… to be extremely generous, let’s call it confused. Now, let’s end the confusion. To do that, I may pull a fact or two from letters written by former U.S. Representative Ed Case. I hope that I get through this ultra-condensation of the facts without introducing any errors of fact. If I do, blame me and not Ed Case or the Office of Elections. I’m not absorbing Case’s or anyone else’s opinions. In fact, any hint of opinion here, is purely my own.
That said, let me get this out of the way right up front: It is my opinion that a Con Con should be seated.
Opinion dealt with, here are the facts:
The Constitution of the State of the Hawai‘i is the basic law of the state. It reflects the Constitution of the United States and accepts/repeats the requirements of that document. All other laws in Hawai‘i must be consistent with the Constitution. Any laws that are not, and the courts confirm that they are not “Constitutional,” must simply be voided and all their effects reversed.
A yes vote on the Con Con question in November means that the state will seat a Constitutional Convention. It does not mean that the Constitution of the State of Hawai‘i will necessarily be changed. The effect of the Con Con, if the members so decide, will be proposals to either change sections of the Constitution or to amend the document. These proposals will then be presented to the voters as questions to be voted up or down, probably stated as yes/no questions at that time. The legislature can propose amendments to the Constitution, but it cannot change the Constitution, nor can the Con Con, the governor, nor any officeholders.
Only the voters can change the Constitution of Hawai‘i.
The Constitution has been amended in the past. It will be amended in the future. The proposal of amendments can come from the legislature or from a Con Con, and no other way.
There have been three Con Cons before. The first adopted the original Constitution in 1950, in preparation for (and as part of Hawai‘i’s bid for) statehood. The other two were in 1968 and 1978. After the 1968 Con Con, Hawai‘i voters adopted all but one of the proposed amendments. The 1978 Con Con proposed 33 amendments (Case’s number), and voters adopted all of them. Since 1978, voters have chosen not to have a Con Con. The question of calling/not calling a Con Con appears on the ballot every 10 years or, if the legislature believes it is needed, sooner.
If voters choose to have a Con Con, the legislature will have to work out the districting of the state for the selection of delegates, determine the number of delegates, the calendar, budgeting and other details. The election of Con Con delegates can be accomplished by a special election or at the next general election, two years after Nov. 4, 2008. That decision rests with the legislature.
Similarly, the proposals of the Con Con for amendments to the Constitution can be submitted to the voters in a special election or at the next general election. If the delegates are selected in the 2010 election, the proposals of the Con Con would be on the 2012 ballot. The process, as you see, could be complete, using special election for either the selection of delegates or the consideration of proposals, or it could take four years.
Case says that past Con Cons have met for about two months. Obviously, being a delegate is a huge responsibility—made bearable by the fact that your work will be “checked” by the voters—and with a two month (or more) schedule, it can also be burdensome.
The other thing about a Con Con is that it can be costly. Months ago, Case suggested that $10 million was a reasonable estimate. Since then, we have all seen estimates of up to $40 million (which seems ridiculous, even in a world where we often pay for road building on the millions-per-mile basis). I am not an expert on the financing of Con Cons, and I seriously doubt that anyone is able to be specific before the legislature establishes the ground rules, which won’t happen until the voters say, “Yes, seat a Con Con,” if they do.
As I see it, even if the scary number of $40 million is correct, the only real question to answer before voting yes or no on a Con Con is the cost-question. I say, it’s worth it. You may not. Other questions like, “Is our Constitution broken?” and “Is there a legal problem with our Constitution?” cannot be answered without seating a Con Con.