What EXACTLY Can Only Be Achieved Through A Constitutional Convention?

[Rick M.]

We're hearing lots of vague ideas but very few actual proposals. Leaving aside, for the moment, that we can amend the State Constitution any time we want without the need of a Constitutional Convention, let's look at the actual changes we want to see if we get a ConCon.

So rather than "Improve Education" say something specific like:

"Insert paragraph giving each family a school voucher for each child which can be used at the school of their choice (public or private). Each child's voucher shall be equal to the amount of the DOE yearly budget divided by the number of school-age students in the state."

Let's not discuss the pros and cons - let's just list the things we ABSOLUTELY NEED a constitutional convention for:

I'll start it off:

1. Delete Article XII Hawaiian Affairs

2. Rewrite ARTICLE XI Section 7 Water Resources to give water ownership to the landowner and to remove the governmental interference in how the water is used.

3. Delete ARTICLE XI Section 8 Nuclear Energy (ban)

4. Add a section to Article XIII (Collective Bargaining) saying, "No employee shall be required to pay dues to a union as a condition of employment"

5. Delete the second paragraph of Article XIII (Collective Bargaining) to eliminate the right of government employees to unionize.

[Dan L.]

Rick, although there is not a single one of your proposals which would not do irreparable damage to Hawai‘i and its people, at least you understand what a constitution is.

A constitution is not a set of laws. It is a framework under which laws operate. The U. S. constitution is an excellent example. For the most part, it defines the mechanisms of government rather than making specific rules. There are exceptions, like the requirement that the writ of habeas corpus never be suspended, but these are rare.

Most state constitutions are huge bulky documents containing page after page of specific regulations which are much better left to law. One excellent thing a ConCon could do would be to pare away hundreds of specific rules and substitute guidelines. Many times, the U. S. constitution includes the phrase “as Congress shall determine” or some similar wording. Hawai‘i’s constitution would be improved by the same practice.

[Rick M.]

For example.....

[jk]

For example, (#2) "to give water ownership to the landowner and to remove the governmental interference in how the water is used" would enable a person who owns land through which a river flows to dump pollutants into the water, polluting the water downstream from his/her property. From your perspective, would this be desirable?

[Rick M.]

I don't believe that your statement is correct. We are only talking about the water USE (e.g. taking away) part of the constitution.

[jk]

I think I am getting an idea of what you mean, but I wonder if you can give me more feedback. Should a person who owns land through which a stream flows be allowed to use the water in the stream by diverting part of it, for example, to grow crops? If so, should the person be allowed to divert all of the water in the stream (leaving the stream bed downstream dry)?

[Rick M.]

I thought I read on this site that the Hawai'i constitution is not particularly lengthy compared to other states' constitutions.

Again, this is very vague. WHAT section to you want to "pare down" and exactly what do you want to eliminate.

It frustrates me that I am the only one giving exact examples of sections that need to be removed.

Everyone else is being very vague and saying things that sound real good but have ABSOLUTELY NO SUBSTANCE AND SPECIFICITY!

[Rick M.]

We do that now :-) It just isn't legal. So we have big lawsuits trying to get the water back from entities like EMI and Wailuku Water and ML&P.

Eliminate this section and we eliminate the lawsuits and get on with the development.

[jk]

So you favor having moneyed interests control most of Hawaii's water rather than having it managed for the common good?

[Rick M.]

I've put out my ideas. But I am not seeing anyone put out THEIR ideas.

The original question was: What can we accomplish with a ConCon that can't be accomplished through the amending process or legislatively?

[Dan L.]

Theoretically, there is nothing a ConCon could do which the legislature could not, either legislatively or byproposing amendments. But from a realistic standpoint, the legislature will never do anything which could be construed as reducing their own power. The only way to do that is through a ConCon.

The thing I would most like a ConCon to do would be to institute an initiative process. (That's quite specific, and I discussed it at some length in another topic.) This could, in theory, be done by amendment, of course; but no legislature will ever voluntarily give up its monopoly on lawmaking.

Eliminating the state-wide school system is another thing which a ConCon could do, and which will never get past the legislature -- at least not in the foreseeable future.

You're right, you're being far more specific than most of us. Probably you've read the constitution more thoroughly, or perhaps you have more time. But I've proposed a few specifics, and a general approach which I think is workable.

[Rick M.]

OK. Here's the Education part:

"There shall be a board of education composed of members who shall be elected in a nonpartisan manner by qualified voters, as provided by law, from two at-large school board districts. The first school board district shall be comprised of the island of Oahu and all other islands not specifically enumerated. The second school board district shall be comprised of the islands of Hawaii, Maui, Lanai, Molokai, Kahoolawe, Kauai and Niihau. Each at-large school board district shall be divided into departmental school districts, as may be provided by law. There shall be at least one member residing in each departmental school district. The Hawaii State Student Council shall select a public high school student to serve as a nonvoting member on the board of education."

So we need to rewrite to say:
"Each community (we have to figure out how to define 'community') shall have its own school board elected from residents of that community"

or maybe

"Each island shall have its own school board elected from residents of that island"

"Section 3. The board of education shall have the power, as provided by law, to formulate statewide educational policy and appoint the superintendent of education as the chief executive officer of the public school system."

Change to: "Each COMMUNITY or ISLAND..."

"Section 4. The State shall promote the study of Hawaiian culture, history and language

"The State shall provide for a Hawaiian education program consisting of language, culture and history in the public schools. The use of community expertise shall be encouraged as a suitable and essential means in furtherance of the Hawaiian education program."

We can just ELIMINATE this. After all, we're living in America now and ENGLISH is the only language that is necessary.

But just as a matter of curiousity, if we elect the School Board and we all want local control, why hasn't the school board just appointed a Superintendent that would implement this?

Why is the elected school board (that WE elected) still concentrating all the power in 'Oahu?

[Keanu]

If english is the only language that is necessary, why is a spanish option even given by government agencies, and banking institutions etc. throughout the country?

I came here with an open mind to listen to ideas on why a new Con Con is necessary and have thus far been disappointed by the lack of sound dialogue. While there have been some proposals that are worthy of consideration, others like the vitriol emanating from Rick's keyboard makes it seem like this whole push for a Con Con is just a way for special interestes to circumvent the current legislative process in order to achieve their goals.