The Con Con question

The Molokai Times
Thursday, May 29, 2008

By Sen. J. Kalani English, (D-6 Hana, E. & Upcountry Maui, Molokai, Lanai & Kaho'olawe)

Once every 10 years, Hawai'i law requires that we ask voters whether there should be a Constitutional Convention to consider changes to our state government's foundational document. This year the Con Con question is upon us again.

Two important considerations should be at the forefront of any public discussion of the advisability of a constitutional convention. First, the constitution should describe the general policies and philosophies that guide us. It establishes our priorities, whether they be for the rights of individuals, our respect for our native culture, or the basic structure of our state government. The specific ways in which we approach these general questions are more properly the subject of legislation or executive action, because those approaches are more responsive than constitutional amendments.

The second consideration goes to whether broad amendments to our constitution are called for by current circumstances.

Our last constitutional convention, in 1978, was very successful. Among its most far-reaching accomplishments was the establishment of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. This indicated serious concerns over the place of our native culture within our system of government. While we have seen changes to some of the approaches that these constitutional provisions described, the concerns behind the effort remain.

In addition, the 1978 Con Con established our Judicial Selection Commission, reflecting a desire to remove some of the political gamesmanship that had grown up around judicial appointments. Once again, broad concerns over a far-reaching question.

The question now is whether we face such broad concerns today.

One indicator that our constitution is satisfactory as it now stands is that the legislature has not seen a large number of proposed amendments in recent years. Like most of my colleagues in the State Senate, I make it a practice to introduce, by request, any legislation presented by constituents. While my goal in providing this service is to allow the community access to the legislative process, it also serves as a good way to maintain a feel for what issues are important to constituents. Having seen few proposals to amend the constitution, I conclude that our current constitution fulfills our needs.

In addition, when the question of a constitutional convention was presented to the voters in 1988 and 1998, the public voted "no." Again, I take that as an indication that a Con Con may not be necessary now.

Finally, we should consider that the product of a constitutional convention may not serve the needs of all of the community.

Rights and protections that were provided in the past may be eroded, and important programs may fall to organized efforts to redirect our priorities to serve narrow interests.

It is too early in the discussion for me to either encourage or discourage a vote for a constitutional convention. I still want to hear the arguments of proponents and opponents. But I believe that we need to consider the question in the proper context, and that context must include questions of broad policy and our desired direction for our state.

Original article URL: http://www.molokaitimes.com/articles/852517599.asp

Return to Sen. English Home Page - KalaniEnglish.com

Home Bills and Resolutions About Senator English Committees Community Profiles Newsletter Archive News Archive Capitol Web Site Media Photos

Connect with Senator English

OUR DISTRICT