PhillyTablet Inquirer Daily News
Mobile
Home Delivery
philly.com
email
font size
comments
2
options
 
Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Time for a constitutional convention
Gov. Rendell says that he is willing to look into whether the state can help out with agencies' interest and penalty payments, but that it depends on whether the state can afford it.

Harrisburg’s 101-day budget delay was further proof that the legislature is incapable of reforming its unproductive ways.


And it’s all the more reason why the state needs to consider a constitutional convention.
 

After the pay-raise scandal in 2005, legislators promised to change their broken system of governing. Then-Speaker Dennis O’Brien (R., Phila.) even appointed a commission to recommend reforms in state government.
 

But the resulting changes were largely window-dressing to temporarily appease the public. The legislature agreed not to vote after 11 p.m., for example, but it dodged more meaningful reforms such as campaign-donor limits.


Even an influx of new representatives in 2006 couldn’t change what came next: indictments against a dozen House Democratic officials for allegedly using public money for campaign purposes, followed by the nation’s longest budget fight. Similar indictments for the GOP are expected soon.


The legislature costs taxpayers about $300 million per year, and Pennsylvanians know they’re not getting their money’s worth.
 

Good-government advocates such as Tim Potts of DemocracyRising/PA are pushing for a constitutional convention to reform state government. There hasn’t been one since 1967-68.
 

Delegates would be chosen from around the state to meet for a period of several months. They would consider, for example, whether to reform the redistricting process, limit campaign donations, move to a part-time legislature, boost education funding, or allow for a graduated income tax. Recommendations would need to be approved by voters.
 

One argument against a convention is that the legislature already has the authority to amend the state constitution. But that lengthy procedure plays into the legislature’s fondness for inertia.
 

The legislature has repeatedly refused to address two big issues contributing heavily to gridlock and unresponsive government — partisan redistricting and campaign finance limits.
 

A convention that looked at just those two problems would be a giant step forward.
 

Perhaps a convention could produce a mechanism for automatically reviewing the constitution periodically and suggesting other needed reforms.
 

The Pennsylvania Bar Association has considered some of these questions and decided that a constitutional convention is “premature.” (No surprise; some lawyers fear their profession could become the target of reformers — a shortsighted excuse.)
 

But PBA President Clifford E. Haines raises valid concerns about how a convention would be organized, and who would set the agenda. It shouldn’t be a free-for-all. That could become unwieldy and unproductive.
For now, the bar association is creating a commission by Dec. 1 to identify weaknesses in state government and how best to address them. If the legislature ignores such advice, popular support for a convention could build.
 

It’s clear that the time for the legislature to reform its broken ways has all but expired. A constitutional convention might be the only way to achieve real reform in Harrisburg.
 
Posted by Inquirer editorial board @ 2:15 AM  Permalink | 2 comments
Comments   
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 8:09 AM, 10/27/2009
    The people are no longer being properly represented in government. This is happening at the city, state and federal levels. How can we possibly trust these politicians and lawyers to investigate and audit themselves, their policies and their employees? Its a conflict of interest at the highest possible level. We have allowed the fox to guard the henhouse for far too long.
    — psyrus
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:15 AM, 10/27/2009
    The influence of special interests on the General Assembly has grown exponentially since 1968, so any convention should include a serious examination of campaign finance and ethics reforms for legislators. They would never voluntarily give up the money that makes it so easy to retain their seats for life. There's also a lot of potential for 'mischief' in reopening the constitution; it's clear that even basic civil rights are still at risk to the tyranny of the majority. The convention would need to focus on improving government efficiency/taxpayer accountablity and avoid delving into divisive social issues that are really none of government's business.
    — Speakingtruth


2 comments
About The Inquirer Editorial Board
Welcome. You're reading the Inquirer Editorial Board's Say What? opinion blog. We hope you enjoy commentary from the Editorial and Commentary pages, in addition to up-to-the-minute opinion postings that appear here for the first time. Here are thumbnail bio sketches and contact information for the editors and writers who produce the newspaper's opinion pages, as well as an archive of recent cartoons by Tony Auth. (Our blog roll follows the ad below.) Please check out the videos from our One Great Idea project. And don't miss our daily online reader polls.
Join on Facebook    Follow on Twitter

Advertise Here