New York Is About to Vote on a Constitutional Convention: Here’s Why You Should Care

Are you for or against the Constitutional Convention?

  • For it

    Votes: 5 29.4%
  • Against it

    Votes: 12 70.6%

  • Total voters
    17
  • Poll closed .

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,234
Reputation
6,810
Daps
90,651
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
In November, New Yorkers will head to the polls to decide on a very significant question that most are only dimly aware of: whether to hold a state constitutional convention, the first in a half-century.

The convention, or Con Con, as it’s known in political circles, is an opportunity to make profound, long-lasting, and much-needed changes to New York’s outdated state constitution — or open a Pandora’s box that could doom working people forever, depending on whom you ask. I’ve written in favor of holding a convention before, but with the vote fast approaching, it’s a good time to lay out arguments for and against the measure, so New York voters understand what’s at stake and what could happen if a majority of them approve rewriting the state constitution.

If a majority statewide votes “yes,” a constitutional convention will be set for the spring of 2019. The convention would be made up of elected delegates, with three provided from each state senate district — there are 63 in total — plus fifteen statewide. Elections would occur next year, and anyone can run to be a delegate.

These delegates would come together with unlimited abilities to propose amending the constitution in any and all ways they can agree upon. Any amendments approved by delegates would need to be ultimately approved by the voters. This is important to remember: No changes can occur to the constitution without statewide approval at the ballot box.

The last New York State constitutional convention was held in 1967, some years after which the law was rewritten to require a vote on a convention every twenty years. Voters turned down a convention in 1997; if this vote fails, New York won’t get another chance to try for one until 2037.


Below, you’ll find common arguments for and against a constitutional convention, and what we might expect if one is approved. The caveat here: With only two conventions in the last century — in 1938 and 1967 — the past certainly doesn’t have to be prologue.

Who Supports Having a Constitutional Convention? And Why?
Though a July Siena College poll found that 47 percent of New Yorkers backed a convention, with only 34 percent opposed, most elected officials and interest groups on both sides of the aisle want the ballot initiative defeated in November. (More on that below.) Those in favor include the good government group Citizens Union; Bill Samuels, a prominent liberal activist and fundraiser; Evan Davis, a former counsel for Mario Cuomo; a group of Women’s Marchers who are hoping a convention could enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution ahead of any Trump attempt to weaken Roe v. Wade; and the New York State Bar Association.

The elder Cuomo supported holding a convention, though his fellow governor son, Andrew, has been noncommittal. The arguments for a convention boil down to being offered a rare chance to enact sweeping change without grinding through a deeply flawed legislative process. The New York State Constitution is an old, unwieldy document — the length of a short novel, at fifty thousand words — that has not been updated since 1938.

Backers of a constitutional convention are largely liberal, though the Republican minority leader of the state assembly, Brian Kolb, also favors holding one. Samuels has spoken about adding a new bill of rights to the constitution — rights to affordable higher education, clean air and water, healthcare, equitable funding for schools — that would make New York a much more progressive place.

Campaign finance and voting bills that have repeatedly failed to pass the Republican-controlled senate, like closing the LLC loophole and allowing early voting, could be written into the constitution. Other things that would never pass any state legislature, including term limits for all lawmakers, could become a reality as well.

For New York City residents, there’s potentially much to gain. Both upstate and downstate communities want more autonomy from the state legislature and governor, in order to control if or how much localities raise income taxes, raise the minimum wage, or in the case of New York City, implement new rent regulations. A home-rule provision in a new constitution would allow a city of more than eight million residents to chart its destiny independent of Albany’s whims, freeing the five boroughs from the yoke of upstate and suburban conservative legislators who have voted to gut protections for tenants.


Some academics also see a far-reaching opportunity to dissolve the state assembly and senate and move to a unicameral legislature — which could take some of the vast leverage away from the executive branch by providing a single legislative body to face off against the governor. A unicameral legislature could be a boon for the city: City interests dominate the assembly but always run into roadblocks in the senate, where the larger districts are more susceptible to gerrymandering.

More small-bore, but not necessarily less consequential, reforms could come out of a convention as well. Legal watchers hope the governor could lose his power to elevate judges to the appellate division — the state’s second-highest court level — to geographic areas they are not from. Former governor George Pataki, a Republican, drew the ire of many in the 2000s when he tapped an upstate conservative judge to serve in an appellate division that included Manhattan.

Convention proponents also hope to lessen the remarkable leverage the governor currently holds over the budgetary process. In 2004, Pataki won a case against the Assembly Speaker at the time, Sheldon Silver, that limited the legislature’s ability to change the governor’s wording in budget bills. As esoteric as this sounds, the ruling has since allowed the executive branch to set just about all the terms of state budget battles.

Without knowing who the delegates are or what issues come to dominate a hypothetical convention, it’s difficult to predict what will really happen. All changes agreed upon at the 1967 convention were eventually voted down because, in part, they were packaged together at the ballot box, and one proposed change — allowing the state to provide funding for religious schools — ultimately sunk the others. Supporters hope the same thing won’t happen again.

Who’s Against Having a Constitutional Convention? And Why?
Opponents are much easier to find. The Republican majority leader of the state senate, John Flanagan, and the Democratic Speaker of the Assembly, Carl Heastie, are against holding a constitutional convention. So are Mayor Bill de Blasio, State Senator Jeff Klein — the leader of the Independent Democratic Conference — and most other politicians in New York State.

Their opposition, in part, is driven by the strenuous and united front against a convention led by the state’s major unions, who fear the loss of state protections for labor rights. They are set to outspend and possibly outmaneuver Con Con. They have formed a group, New Yorkers Against Corruption, to harness this energy and money.


Conservatives see much to lose from a Con Con, too. Guns-rights groups and the New York State Conservative Party, formed originally to push Republicans to the right, have joined New Yorkers Against Corruption, out of fear that progressive interests would steer New York too far left.

One argument made against a convention is that the delegates will end up being elected officials or lobbyists determined to protect the status quo, as happened in 1967. With a convention likely to occur during the 2019 legislative session, state lawmakers might be deterred from serving as delegates alongside their regular Albany duties.

The more significant argument animating opposition is the potential loss of strong labor protections baked into a constitution last written in 1938, when organized labor was on the rise. Pension obligations could be wiped away. Liberal opponents of a convention warn that right-wing billionaires like the Koch brothers and Robert Mercer, the Donald Trump backer and Breitbart funder, could hijack the process by spending millions to elect fiercely anti-union delegates.

So far, no billionaire has spent significant money for or against holding a constitutional convention in New York, and there’s no evidence the Koch brothers have any interest in investing their vast resources here when so many battlegrounds in the Midwest and South have preoccupied them. Still, anything is possible, and labor unions don’t see Con Con as a risk worth taking.

Another question is how quickly, if a convention wins at the ballot box in November, progressive convention supporters could mobilize to elect delegates and strategize for what would be an undertaking unprecedented in most New Yorkers’ lifetimes. Proponents haven’t articulated much of a game plan for electing delegates or keeping the process out of the hands of more nefarious elements.

Of course, most of the great organizing forces in this state, like labor unions, are working to defeat it. They could change course and throw their muscle into protecting their rights at a 2019 Con Con.

The odds, however, of a state constitution stripping away significant labor protections and passing in a statewide vote are not that high. New York is increasingly Democratic. Any Mercer/Koch expenditure would be countered by the combined forces of organized labor and the political establishment in one of the greatest pitched wars the state has ever seen.


That is, if any of this comes to pass. As in 1997, most voters may just say “no” to a Con Con.

New York Is About to Vote on a Constitutional Convention: Here’s Why You Should Care | Village Voice
 

Scholar

Superstar
Joined
Dec 11, 2015
Messages
8,939
Reputation
795
Daps
24,342
We elect people and have unions to work on our behalf. They should do just that. We are in the age of hunger for populism and NY is a liberal state. Anything proposed can be voted down. Also get the chance to finally have Albany do something :yeshrug:. Considering it
 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,234
Reputation
6,810
Daps
90,651
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
New York City Mayor
One of the biggest achievements of Mayor Bill de Blasio’s first term was the creation of universal pre-K for 4-year-olds, a program that took much pressured, fast-paced planning on the mayor’s part. (It should come as no surprise that one of his central promises for a second term is free, full-day preschool for all 3-year-olds.)

The mayor, a Democrat, is also trying to preserve or create thousands of affordable housing units, though some people are angry about his rezoning plans. And with murders standing at a historic low, he has preached a plan to create a friendlier, more neighborhood-focused police force, while facing criticism for the slowness of some public safety reforms.

Mr. de Blasio has also faced withering questions over political favors since one of his biggest donors, Jona S. Rechnitz, described in an unrelated trial how he tried buying City Hall influence.

Continue reading the main story
spoken out against plans to make undocumented immigrants eligible for state financial aid for college.

In an interview with The Times about managing an enormous city government, she criticized the mayor’s response to rising homelessness in the city, calling instead for more vocational training opportunities and for giving property to nonprofits who can provide housing.

In his interview with The Times, Mr. de Blasio acknowledged mistakes and missed opportunities in addressing the homelessness issue. (He also called cargo shorts, a much-maligned piece of his gym outfit, a “valuable part of anyone’s wardrobe.”)

New Jersey Governor
On one side is Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno, a Republican and the second-in-command to Gov. Chris Christie, who has tried getting out from under the governor’s shadow as scandal engulfed his administration.

On the other is Philip D. Murphy, a Democrat, a former Wall Street banker who has downplayed two of the biggest entries on his resume: a 23-year stint at Goldman Sachs and a four-year tenure under President Obama as ambassador to Germany.

The New York Times looked at where the candidates fall on a range of crucial policy issues.

Mr. Murphy favors raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour, legalizing marijuana and creating tougher gun laws. Ms. Guadagno has made reducing property taxes a centerpiece of her campaign.

In Mad Libs-style letters both candidates filled out for The Times, Ms. Guadagno said she was “fed up” with “taxes” and “sanctuary states.” Mr. Murphy said he, too, was “fed up,” singling out “our economy” and “lack of fairness” as causes of frustration.

In the waning days of the campaign, Ms. Guadagno veered to the right on immigration, accusing Mr. Murphy of seeking to turn New Jersey into a “sanctuary state,” releasing a controversial TV ad about an infamous murder in Newark and declaring, inaccurately, that her opponent would allow violent criminals to stay in the country.

Other Notable Races
In the New York City suburbs, several races have turned quite vicious. In the Nassau County race for county executive, a mailer suggests one candidate would “roll out the welcome mat” for the violent street gang MS-13. In the Westchester County executive race, issues have taken a back seat to talk about a Rolex watch, unpaid parking tickets and so-called dark money from a Trump-friendly PAC.

The next district attorney in Suffolk County on Long Island will face pressing questions about how to handle the opioid epidemic and MS-13. The sitting district attorney, who had announced months ago he would not seek re-election, was charged last month with trying to derail a federal investigation into a brutal assault by the county’s former police chief.

The candidates to replace him are Ray Perini, a Republican, and Tim Sini, a Democrat.

And President Trump’s influence on local politics has been deeply felt in Greenwich, Conn., where political newcomers, many of them women, are seeking seats on the council that handles town business.

A Constitutional Convention?
And finally, a statewide proposition, Proposition 1, would force a monthslong, everything-on-the-table examination of New York State’s founding document by authorizing a constitutional convention — the first in the nation in more than a quarter-century.

The question has split some like-minded groups, such as the League of Women Voters of New York and Planned Parenthood, while uniting some conservatives and major labor groups.

Ethics reform, sweeping changes to the judiciary, easing the power granted to the governor and legislative leaders — all of it would be fair game.

Just Tuning In to New York’s Elections? Here’s a Rundown of the Races
 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,234
Reputation
6,810
Daps
90,651
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
too many downsides and unknowns


this whole things seems very last minute


I'll be voting no

Trump and his people are in power now is not the time to change shyt for twenty years.

I'm personally for the Convention, because like @ScholarD said, it's non-binding. I'd like to see what the delegates come up with.

But on the other hand, considering we can't even establish a Dem house, senate, and governorship, I completely understand why folks are worried. anything where conservatives are teaming up with neo-liberals should be extremely troubling.
 

Scholar

Superstar
Joined
Dec 11, 2015
Messages
8,939
Reputation
795
Daps
24,342
What do you all think about Proposal 2
Statewide Proposal Number 2, an Amendment: Allowing the complete or partial forfeiture of a public officer’s pension if he or she is convicted of a certain type of felony
 

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
87,926
Reputation
3,596
Daps
156,485
Reppin
Brooklyn
What do you all think about Proposal 2
Statewide Proposal Number 2, an Amendment: Allowing the complete or partial forfeiture of a public officer’s pension if he or she is convicted of a certain type of felony


Prop 2 is to cut pensions for state workers who commit felonies on the job

seems a bit vague

:manny:
 
Last edited:

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
87,926
Reputation
3,596
Daps
156,485
Reppin
Brooklyn
I'm personally for the Convention, because like @ScholarD said, it's non-binding. I'd like to see what the delegates come up with.

But on the other hand, considering we can't even establish a Dem house, senate, and governorship, I completely understand why folks are worried. anything where conservatives are teaming up with neo-liberals should be extremely troubling.


Hell there's plenty of elected dems in nyc who are non-aligned and vote with Republicans. I can't remember what they're calling them.

:snoop:


I don't hate populism but in this country right now populism is the Tea Party and whatever these white supremacists are calling themselves today

I trust New Yorkers more than the reset of the country but ehh...


Also they can amend things by passing it in two consecutive legislatures or putting things to ballot I believe. That shouldn't be difficult but is.
 
Top