About
The Albany Project seeks to return New York State Government to its rightful owners - the people.

Getting Started at the Albany Project

New York Blogwire



This belongs to you. Take it back...

Important constitutional reading

by: simonstl

Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 22:17:54 PM EDT


Well, important reading for insomniacs and people who'd like change, anyway. We have a messy and deeply overspecified (but still sometimes underspecified!) state constitution.

There's been talk once again about the need for New York to have a Constitutional Convention. I don't love Rudy Giuliani's proposals for term limits or supermajority votes on taxes, but otherwise he seems sort of mostly on target. Check it out - you might be pleasantly surprised. It's not just Rudy, though: Mario Cuomo supports it (in a gossip column?), it's turning up in blogs of frustrated voters, and there's been plenty of murmuring in editorials.

Assemblyman Richard Brodsky's even put in a bill to put a convention on the ballot, "referred to government operations". He's also entered a bill for changing how delegates are selected.

So are folks here at TAP ready to run to be Constitutional Convention delegates, if such an election breaks out? I know there are challenges with gerrymandered Senate districts, entrenched party machines, and a lot more, but seriously - start thinking about running now. The next mandatory vote on having a convention is in 2017, which is a long ways away, but given current trends, it could well happen sooner.

simonstl :: Important constitutional reading

Here are the current rules (from Article XIX of the state constitution) for how a convention happens, with some paragraph breaks added for readability.

[Future constitutional conventions; how called; election of delegates; compensation; quorum; submission of amendments; officers; employees; rules; vacancies]

§2. At the general election to be held in the year nineteen hundred fifty-seven, and every twentieth year thereafter, and also at such times as the legislature may by law provide, the question "Shall there be a convention to revise the constitution and amend the same?" shall be submitted to and decided by the electors of the state;

and in case a majority of the electors voting thereon shall decide in favor of a convention for such purpose, the electors of every senate district of the state, as then organized, shall elect three delegates at the next ensuing general election, and the electors of the state voting at the same election shall elect fifteen delegates-at-large.

The delegates so elected shall convene at the capitol on the first Tuesday of April next ensuing after their election, and shall continue their session until the business of such convention shall have been completed.

Every delegate shall receive for his or her services the same compensation as shall then be annually payable to the members of the assembly and be reimbursed for actual traveling expenses, while the convention is in session, to the extent that a member of the assembly would then be entitled thereto in the case of a session of the legislature.

A majority of the convention shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, and no amendment to the constitution shall be submitted for approval to the electors as hereinafter provided, unless by the assent of a majority of all the delegates elected to the convention, the ayes and noes being entered on the journal to be kept.

The convention shall have the power to appoint such officers, employees and assistants as it may deem necessary, and fix their compensation and to provide for the printing of its documents, journal, proceedings and other expenses of said convention. The convention shall determine the rules of its own proceedings, choose its own officers, and be the judge of the election, returns and qualifications of its members.

In case of a vacancy, by death, resignation or other cause, of any district delegate elected to the convention, such vacancy shall be filled by a vote of the remaining delegates representing the district in which such vacancy occurs. If such vacancy occurs in the office of a delegate-at-large, such vacancy shall be filled by a vote of the remaining delegates-at-large.

Any proposed constitution or constitutional amendment which shall have been adopted by such convention, shall be submitted to a vote of the electors of the state at the time and in the manner provided by such convention, at an election which shall be held not less than six weeks after the adjournment of such convention.

Upon the approval of such constitution or constitutional amendments, in the manner provided in the last preceding section, such constitution or constitutional amendment, shall go into effect on the first day of January next after such approval.

(Formerly §2 of Art. 14. Renumbered and amended by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and approved by vote of the people November 8, 1938; further amended by vote of the people November 6, 2001.)

(And if you want a nicer version to print out and keep at your bedside, a PDF version (305KB) is available.)

Tags: , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
The TAP Delegation (4.00 / 2)
I approve!  If we get to this point, I fully believe we should organize with like-minded groups (Working Families?) and run progressive, reform based candidates for such a convention.

WFP??? (4.00 / 1)
Here's hoping that if they rewrite the state constitution, they take out the 100% guarantee of corruption, slime, and money-passing that is electoral fusion.

I somehow think the WFP wouldn't approve.


[ Parent ]
Great Idea (4.00 / 1)
Remove any ability of third parties to exist in a state increasingly moving towards one party domination as a way to get rid of corruption!  Genius!!

[ Parent ]
No one's saying get rid of third parties (4.00 / 1)
Just saying that parties should have to run one of their members.

I've seen the WFP CP and IP all take cash and jobs for endorsements. Seen it. Personally. Its disgusting. This should absolutely be illegal, like it is in every other damn state.


[ Parent ]
I actually like fusion voting (4.00 / 1)
but anything sketchy and under-handed that you're referring to should absolutely be illegal and is wrong.  But the corruption of individuals does not mean that the system of fusion voting is automatically corrupt.  In fact I think there's a lot of values to it.  But I would be happy to have a floor debate with you and others on this subject at the convention!

[ Parent ]
The problem with fusion voting (4.00 / 1)
The obvious problem is the back room deals made in exchange for getting that "second line" on the ballot.  It is not only tinged with corruption, it is corrupt.

I would love to see a law that limits candidates to one line each; this would force third parties to get their own candidates, especially for governor.  There are many local races where an otherwise strong candidate is unable to get a major party nomination; with all the third party slots available such a candidate has a real chance of getting elected, and could eventually result in breaking up the two-party system (in most district, read "one-party system") that pervades our political setup.


[ Parent ]
This would effectively kill third parties (0.00 / 0)
The only reason third parties exist in New York state is because of fusion voting.  You remove fusion voting, they will no longer be able to reach ballot access status.  Look at the Greens, the Liberals when they did not endorse the "correct" candidate for governor, and other small parties.  The surviving third parties all maintain ballot access status because they cross endorse.  

I would love it if the barriers to entry for minor parties were substantially reduced (I'm not a big fan of SMD in general).  However, we must recognize the system we live in the and the consequences of policies we propose.  Removing electoral fusion would destroy third parties in New York state.  


[ Parent ]
What third parties? (0.00 / 0)
We don't have third parties. We have leeches.

A party runs candidates for office and has a platform and principles and makes decisions based on those principles.

The NDP is a third party. The Greens in San Francisco are a third party. The Liberal Democrats in the UK are a third party.

The only third party in New York is the Libertarian Party. Killing fusion will HELP them, not hurt them.


[ Parent ]
Help? (0.00 / 0)
Help them by preventing them from being able to maintain a place on the ballot?  That's nonsensical.  The Libertarians are trivial to the point where they attract far less than 1% of the vote in most races, even local ones.  That's a model for trivial unimportance, which apparently is what you want for third parties in New York.

[ Parent ]
even good folks get caught up in backroom dealing (4.00 / 1)
And in New York, it seems to happen to everyone over time, no matter what their motives.

The way to fix that, I think, is to make backroom dealing the hard way to get things done rather than the easy way.

I suspect most everyone agrees that New York election law is a disaster that spreads corruption, but I doubt everyone agrees about how to fix it.


[ Parent ]
2017 lets go (4.00 / 2)
We needed a convention in 97 and I am sorry I did not get a chance to run.  I know we need new amendments and changes in the NY constitution.  I could not vote for the gender neutral amendments a couple years ago in part that we had a chance for a convention in 97 and NY said no.

We HAVE to prevent machine delegates from taking over the convention (4.00 / 3)


Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. (4.00 / 1)
So I give Rudy credit.  Anyway, if I were allowed to give my two cents, I think the state senate should mirror the federal Senate - no more re-drawable districts.  Each county should get one senator, who serves at-large, with six year terms and staggered elections.  Thus, Upstate gets a real voice in the state government.  The senator from Lewis County gets the same voice as the senator from Manhattan (New York County).  Otherwise, why have a state senate at all if it's just another legislative body like the Assembly?

agreed (4.00 / 1)
I never understood that about the Senate.

[ Parent ]
it used to be the way (4.00 / 1)
Steaming Pile describes, but court rulings on district sizes declared that unconstitutional for everything except the US Senate.  You can find details in the early part of this discussion.

Without a US constitutional amendment (unlikely) or weighted voting (yecch), the State Senate can't be like the US Senate.


[ Parent ]
Then what is the point? (4.00 / 4)
What is the point of having two houses, then?

Someone justify the State Senate's existence to me.


[ Parent ]
Something to talk about at the convention! n/t (4.00 / 1)


[ Parent ]
there hasn't been one for a long long time (4.00 / 1)
It's just hard getting ridding of it, especially after decades of gerrymandering had given us a Democratic Assembly and a Republican Senate.  Republicans see the Senate as "theirs", or did.

Somehow New York managed to take divided government and make it an excuse for strongmen to negotiate amongst themselves.


[ Parent ]
cool (4.00 / 1)
interesting to see that they phrased it in terms of incentives for legislators to produce particular results.

[ Parent ]
Is A Convention Needed For These Issues? (0.00 / 0)
I agree with the assessment that Rudy's proposals are generally on-target--I'd say even painfully obvious--with the exceptions of term limits (highly debatable) and supermajorities for tax increases (great, make us even more like increasingly ungovernable California).

But is a convention really needed? Can't reforms such as campaign finance, redistricting, judicial pay, succession for Lt. Gov., and the budget process be accomplished legislatively? I understand that things that can be done legislatively can be undone legislatively, but things that are enshrined in the Constitution can only be undone by undoing the Constitution; it doesn't seem to be the most flexible of instruments.

Even though reform has been slow to get started, there had been, at long last, at least some movement even before the current blow-up. I'd prefer to see what the legislature will do in the next few years (there's a chance the Senate might be more productive after the next election) before resorting to a convention to address these issues.


The problem (0.00 / 0)
is that accomplishing this proposal in-house means either electing more reform-minded candidates or pressuring the current crop of legislators to do it themselves.  And the problems we're trying to fix are the same problems that prevent either of those options.  I never thought I'd support such a radical measure, but it seems to me that a citizen-led Constitutional Convention is the only way left to reform our state.

[ Parent ]
Why Not Wait And See? (0.00 / 0)
I was told by more than one reliable source that before the Senate farce popped up, there was some chance of getting public campaign financing in New York. New York! I was shocked that there was any chance at all. So maybe the prospect of in-house reforms are not as long as we might have thought.

Committee reforms were in the works, even with present membership. Give members some real power, and maybe we'll see more serious people running for office--even more reform-minded ones in addition to the ones that are already there.

So I'm not yet convinced that a convention is necessary. Given the slow but discernible progress that was already being made, and given the prospect of continued shifts in the makeup of the Senate in future elections, I think we can afford to wait a few years with cautious optimism. If that optimism is not rewarded, then I'd give more credence to the need for a convention.


[ Parent ]
I've heard that story (4.00 / 1)
too many times to believe it any longer.  My "cautious optimism" went out of date a few years ago, maybe around 2004...

[ Parent ]
That's Understandable, But... (0.00 / 0)
I understand the frustration. And I can't deny some justified skepticism.

But I also think one should be open to the substantial chance that things are different now, and may be more different going forward. There is a break on the chokehold in the Senate, the first in decades, and it may be more substantial after the next election. For the first time, we had, though briefly, all three state leaders personally supporting major reforms.

When things are moving in our direction, though not as fast as we would like, I think it's best to have a little more patience to see how they pan out. With a convention, there's a lot more uncertainty as to how things would change, and they would be much harder to undo if we don't like them. The rewards of continuing to push to add to the slight momentum that we've gained seems to me to outweigh the risks of throwing everything up for grabs. And we can always throw everything up for grabs in a couple of years if reformers fail to take advantage of the improving situation.

To quote someone else, I'd like to give them a chance, then give them hell.


[ Parent ]
If the convention did the following (0.00 / 0)
(1) UNICAMERAL LEGISLATURE
(2) NONPARTISAN REDISTRICTING (not sure how to, but it must be possible)

Then it would already be worth it.

If we ended up with neither, a Constitutional convention would not be worth it.


[ Parent ]
I don't see how to get a unicameral legislature (0.00 / 0)
without a Constitutional convention.

It would gore the oxes of too many legislators.


[ Parent ]
perhaps a nonpartisan blog/site (4.00 / 2)
Perhaps we should consider setting up a nonpartisan blog or site to attract NY bloggers of other persuasions (GOP, Green, etc) for discussion and buzz building.

definitely a good idea (0.00 / 0)
I can offer hosting, but my infrastructure tends to be Movable Type, which isn't great for community conversation building.

Anyone have ideas for how best to go about this?


[ Parent ]
Scoop (0.00 / 0)
Can I go out on a limb here and say:  I really don't like Scoop software?  It works at a place like TAP which is smaller and more collegial, but it's become a barrier to conversation at big places like Daily Kos (troll ratings abuse, diaries that nobody reads or even sees).


[ Parent ]
Mario's supported Constitutional Convention since he was Gov (0.00 / 0)
He'd go on that radio show on NPR every week, and no matter what the topic was, he'd end up back at "And this is why we need a Constitutional Convention!"

So, Mario Cuomo's been supporting a constitutional convention since at least the mid-1980s.


*Must* change delegate selection *before* constitutional convention (0.00 / 0)
The method enshrined in the State Constitution is crap.  Three at-large from each State Senate district?  Ithaca would end up with no representation at all.

Absolutely ridiculous.


The Albany Project

Please take my Blog Reader Project survey.

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


NY blogs

Politics

Adirondack Almanack
Buffalo Geek
Buffalo Pundit
Capitol Confidential
Daily Gotham
Daily Politics
DMI Blog
DragonFlyEye
Empire Page
Empire Zone
Gothamist
Gotham Gazette
Group News Blog
Jason Gooljar
Left of the Hudson
Living In Dryden
Lost In The Ozone
McHugh Watch
Nassau GOP Watch
Planet Albany
Politicker NY
Politics on the Hudson
Reform NY
Rochester Turning
Room 8
Simply Left Behind
Take19
The Community Alliance

Think Tanks

Brennan Center for Justice
Citizens Budget Commission
Citizens Union
Drum Major Institute
Fiscal Policy Institute
New Democracy Project
Progressive States

Organizations

Citizen Action
Citizens for Better Government in New York
Common Cause
New York Citizens for Clean Elections
Progressive States Network
>
National Blogs

Politics

AmericaBlog
Crooks and Liars
DailyKos
Digby
Eschaton
Firedoglake
MyDD
Political Cortex
Senate Guru
Skippy
Swing State Project
Talk Left
Talking Points Memo
The Right's Field

LBAN Network

Agonist
All Spin Zone
AlterNet
AMERICAblog
American Street
ArchPundit
BAGNewsnotes
BartCop
Big Head DC
Blogging of the Pres
BlogACTIVE
Bluegrass Report
Bluegrass Roots
Blue Indiana
BlueJersey
Blue Mass. Group
BlueOregon
BlueNC
Bob Geiger
Booman
BRAD Blog
Brendan Calling
Buckeye State Blog
Burnt Orange Report
Calitics
Capitol Annex
Carpetbagger Report
Chris Floyd
Clay Cane
Cliff Schecter
Comments from Left Field
Confined Space
Corrente
Cotton Mouth
Crooks and Liars
culture kitchen
Cursor
Daily Gotham
Daily Kos
David Corn
Democrats.com
Dem Bloggers
Deride and Conquer
Democratic Underground
Digby
DovBear
Drudge Retort
Ed Cone
ePluribus Media
Eschaton
Ezra Klein
Feministe
Feministing
Firedoglake
Fired Up
First Draft
Frameshop
Greatscat!
Green Mountain Daily
Greg Palast
Hoffmania
Horse's Ass
Hughes for America
In Search of Utopia
Is That Legal?
Jesus' General
Jon Swift
Juan Cole
Keystone Politics
Kick!
KnoxViews
Las Vegas Gleaner
Latino Pundit
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Left Coaster
Left in the West
Liberal Avenger
Liberal Oasis
Loaded Orygun
Mahablog
Majikthise
Make Them Accountable
Matthew Yglesias
MaxSpeak
Media Girl
Michigan Liberal
Minnesota Campaign Report
Minnesota Monitor
MyDD
My Left Nutmeg
My Left Wing
My Two Sense
Nathan Newman
Needlenose
Nevada Today
News Corpse
News Dissector
Newshoggers
News Hounds
Nitpicker
Oliver Willis
onegoodmove
OpenLeft
PageOneQ
Pam's House Blend
Pandagon
People's Rep. of Seabrook
PinkDome
Politics1
Political Animal
Political Wire
Poor Man Institute
Prairie State Blue
Progressive Historians
Raising Kaine
Raw Story
Reno Discontent
Republic of T
Rhode Island's Future
Rochester Turning
Rocky Mountain Report
Rod 2.0
Rox Populi
Rude Pundit
Sadly, No!
Satirical Political Report
Seeing The Forest
Shakesville
SirotaBlog
SistersTalk
Skippy the Bush Kangaroo
Slacktivist
Smirking Chimp
SquareState
Suburban Guerrilla
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
Talk Left
Tapped
Taylor Marsh
Tattered Coat
Texas Kaos
The Albany Project
The Blue State
The Democratic Daily
The Hollywood Liberal
The Reaction
The Talent Show
This Modern World
Town Called Dobson
Turn Maine Blue
Uppity Wisconsin
Wampum
War and Piece
WashBlog
Watching the Watchers
West Virginia Blue
Young Philly Politics
Young Turks

Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless

blog radio

Get the albany project in your inbox! Just enter your email address

Delivered by FeedBurner

____________________


Active Users
Currently 0 user(s) logged on.

Powered by: SoapBlox