   | ||
 PACleanSweep.com
Home Page
The Elections
The Incumbents
Getting Involved
PCS Newsroom PCS Opinion PCS Audio PCS Photos About PCS Contact PCS Founder's Statement Contribute Now! Resources Other Sites |
Constitutional Convention Q & A What is a constitutional convention?
 A convention is one of three ways available to change Pennsylvania's Constitution. At a convention, delegates openly debate proposed changes to the document and make recommendations, subject to ratification by the voters. The other two ways to change the Constitution are by amendment. In the regular amendment process, a proposed change must be approved by a simple majority in two consecutive sessions of the legislature and then be ratified by the voters. This process can take up to five years to complete. In the case of a major emergency in the Commonwealth, an amendment can be passed during only one session of the legislature, but it must be approved by a two-thirds majority. A majority of voters must also ratify these emergency amendments. A convention is usually called in response to some crisis in public confidence, be it internal or external to the workings of government. Conventions can solve problems which are impossible or unlikely to be solved using the regular legislative process. Do we need to change the Constitution?
Since the pay raise of 2005, many Pennsylvanians have realized that portions of our Constitution are simply not being followed or enforced. Others have called for adding legislative term limits, changing the size of the legislature, providing for referendum, initiative and/or recall, modifying the way we select judges for appellate courts and setting new guidelines for legislative redistricting, just to list a few ideas. If citizens want to discuss these issues, a convention is the proper forum for doing so with an eye on the structure of government as a whole. One can only imagine the arduous task of trying to discuss such changes individually through the amendment process. It could also be argued that state government is currently functioning under a cloud of suspicion. A convention would help clear the air so Pennsylvania government can regain the trust of citizens and focus on the business of governing the Commonwealth. Has Pennsylvania held a convention before?
Yes, on five different occasions. Our first convention was held in 1776 in response to a request from the Continental Congress to all 13 colonies in anticipation of declaring independence from England. Subsequently, conventions were held in 1790, 1837, 1873 and 1967 to update Pennsylvania's Constitution. How is a convention assembled?
Although the 1776 Constitution prescribed a method for calling a convention, that provision was removed in 1790. Since that time, conventions have been called by an act of the General Assembly, referred to as the enabling act. Do voters have any say in the matter?
If modern tradition is followed in the enabling act, voters would have an opportunity to either confirm or deny the need for a convention through a statewide referendum. If approved, voters would then elect the delegates to a convention. Once the convention adjourns, voters would vote to approve or deny any changes the convention may propose under the terms of the enabling act. In 1790, however, the people of Pennsylvania were not given any opportunity to approve the convention, nor did they vote to adopt the proposed changes - the new Constitution was simply ratified by the legislature. It all depends on the enabling act. Who would be the delegates to a convention, and how many delegates would serve?
This would also depend on the enabling act. For instance, in 1790 the legislature itself served as the delegates. In 1837, one delegate from each House and Senate district was elected to the convention. In 1873, there were 133 total delegates - three from each of the 33 existing senate districts, 28 at-large statewide delegates and a handful of additional delegates from the Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Scranton/Wilkes-Barre areas. In 1967, there were 163 delegates. Three were elected from each of the state's 50 senate districts. They were joined by 12 legislative leaders and the Lieutenant Governor, who all served in ex officio capacity with delegate voting rights. The 13 public officials also served as the convention's preparatory committee. Who could be a candidate for delegate?
While the enabling acts for the 1837 and 1874 conventions did not specify the manner of nominating delegate candidates, the enabling act for the 1967 convention mandated that candidates were to be nominated by the local Democratic and Republican party committees. Other individuals could run, but they were required to collect the signatures of 500 voters on petitions and pay a fee. Is there a danger that a convention could get bogged down in controversial issues such as gun rights, abortion or same-sex marriage?
Not if the enabling act expressly excludes Article I (the Declaration of Rights) of the Constitution from the convention's discussion. A convention today should be focused on the structure and integrity of government rather than policy issues. It must be noted that in 1873 there was such an exemption in the enabling act, but the convention still tampered with Article I and the voters later ratified those changes. This could be prevented today by including fidelity to the limitations of the enabling act in the delegate oath of office. This additional step to protect Article I was not taken in 1873. What about other divisive partisan issues not included in Article I, such as a graduated income tax or school funding issues?
These and other typical policy issues, which are best discussed in the regular legislative process, could be avoided by having the enabling act require the convention's proposals be approved by a two-thirds majority of the delegates on final passage. This would also help in keeping structural reforms to only those able to clear a higher consensus hurdle at a convention. Are there any dangers in holding a convention? Could mistakes be made? Is it a “Pandora’s Box?”
There are no guarantees, but in today’s climate the people of Pennsylvania are in the proper mindset to tackle a convention with a willingness to thoughtfully deliberate on improving the structure of government in Pennsylvania, while checking their partisan differences at the door. In 1873, heavy coverage of the convention by newspapers kept Pennsylvanians well informed of the proceedings. With today's modern communication capabilities, that attention would surely be more pronounced. Ultimately, if the convention's proposals are not satisfactory to the majority of Pennsylvanians, they can simply vote to decline them - and the existing provisions of the Constitution would remain in effect. A limited constitutional convention called through a carefully crafted enabling act would be subject to court challenge if it oversteps the limitations imposed on it. This legal cure would be available up to the time of voter ratification of the convention’s proposals. As a citizen, what can I do to insure a convention is properly conducted?
Pay attention and get involved! Many of the most important questions regarding a convention would be answered in the General Assembly's enabling act. If the enabling act is not carefully crafted, a convention could have serious flaws and unintended consequences. Even if the enabling act is rock solid, citizens must still pay close attention to all aspects of a convention. A convention is a serious undertaking, as a new Constitution could be in effect for 100 years or more. Are there any proposed enabling acts at this time?
HB649 and SB291 were introduced earlier last year. Both follow the 1967 convention model, where elected officials served as ex officio delegates. Both call for ratification of the convention’s proposals at primary, rather than general elections. Both allow local political committees to hand-pick candidates for delegate. These provisions are not likely to be supported by the voters in today’s climate. SB1290 has now been introduced by Senator Mike Folmer for eactment in 2008. PACleanSweep suggested this language for an enabling act to the Senate State Government Committee in 2007. You can view the language (prepared for 2009) - the "Citizens' Constitutional Convention Act of 2009" - by clicking here. What's important regarding any enabling act is that all Pennsylvanians fully review and understand its provisions and communicate their opinion of its merits to their Senators and Representatives. Is there any reason to call a convention now rather than later?
One of the important factors is the 2010 federal census. If a convention were to discuss changing the size of the legislature or the way legislative districts are drawn, those plans should be in place before mandatory redistricting occurs as a result of the census. We don't need to rush, but 2010 is approaching. What are the chances the General Assembly will approve an enabling act?
PACleanSweep is optimistic, but we also realize human nature dictates that those who hold power may be somewhat reluctant to relinquish any of it to a convention of the people. Because some of the focus of a convention would be on the legislature itself, there is no doubt there will be legislators who resist a convention. On the other hand, Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution states: "All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper." The question for each legislator faced with a carefully crafted enabling act will be: Do you believe in the principles of Article I, Section 2? Or more simply: Will you yield to the ultimate right of the people to shape their government? We also believe it could make for an important campaign issue in 2008. More Convention Reading:
SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Citizens' Constitutional Convention Act of 2009 TESTIMONY: Provided to the PA Senate by PACleansweep REPORT: Constitutional change in the 20th century REPORT: Constitutional change in the 18th century OpEd: Should the governor decide which reforms to make?  Click here to see how Pennsylvanians voted in the PACleanSweep convention poll! Questions? Comments? Email us! |
 PACleanSweep
Discussion Group Join the Discussion |
Paid for by the PACleanSweep PAC | 109 West Main Street, Annville PA 17003 | Russ Diamond, Chair | Leo Knepper, Treasurer