Hawaii Alliance Sponsors "NO to ConCon"

Add a Comment

9 Comments

Comment by Peter Kay on September 29, 2008 at 9:29pm

This is really good Curtis! You should repost under your own blog area here on this site.

Comment by Curtis Muraoka on September 29, 2008 at 7:21pm

My "gentle" blog on HSTA Member site

Con Con: Yes or No, Just Vote
September 27 2008

Our union is recommending we vote NO on Con Con but I’m not writing about that recommendation.

I’m mainly concerned that so many citizens don’t know what a Constitutional Convention is.

Of those who do, many don’t know what one might look like—what the process would be.

And there is broad confusion about issues that might be usefully addressed through a citizens’ caucus like Con Con.

This blog is NOT about the last of those—to closely examine multiple issues in a blog would be like cyber-waterboarding. So out of mercy for me and anyone who reads this, I’ll just briefly describe “Con Con” with what sanity I have.

A Con Con is basically about the People directly suggesting changes (not making changes) in Hawai`i’s constitution. The notion of citizens making and remaking a constitution is rooted with the Founding Fathers.

On February 21, 1787, the Continental Congress resolved that:
“… On the second Monday in May next a Convention of delegates who shall have been appointed by the several States be held at Philladelphia (sic) for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation...”

The last Hawai`i Con Con was in 1978. Previous Con Cons were held in 1969, and before that in 1950 as the Territory angled toward statehood. The 1978 Con Con resulted in, among other things, the return of Kaho`olawe, creation of OHA, preservation of Hawaiian culture including the adoption of Hawaiian diacritical marks, and the Hawaiian language becoming an official state language for the first time since 1893.

In 1969 and 1978, 102 delegates were elected in total, two each from House of Representative Districts. However, there is no reason any future Con Cons couldn’t consist of one delegate per House and Senate districts (76 total), one delegate per House district (51 total), or even one delegate per Senate district (25 total).

It’s unclear how much a Con Con “lite” might cost, but I imagine one could be run for a fraction of the $20 million price tag most often reported in media.

If one is approved, and no matter how many delegates (102, 76, 51, 25 or some other number forwarded by the legislature), it would be a series of open caucuses where citizen delegates meet in committees to author proposals for consideration by the delegate general assembly.

If approved, proposed changes would be placed on the next General Election ballot for approval or rejection by popular vote.

My biggest point is not if we should or shouldn’t hold a Con Con. It has to do with citizen participation in the vote on our most critically important government document.

In 1998, the Con Con question was defeated because blank ballots are counted as NO, even though the majority of marked ballots reflected a YES vote. A clear majority vote either way preserves democracy. A NO vote by default creates distrust and division. There is still this shadow hanging over the process from a decade ago.

I’m simply recommending we VOTE on Con Con. YES or NO, it’s up to you. Rejecting an important constitutional right by default is no way to preserve democracy.

Comment by Curtis Muraoka on September 26, 2008 at 11:01pm

I hope people consider the source--unions do not speak with objectivity. They have an agenda.

Keep an open mind, but recognize when someone is trying to fill it with self-serving garbage.

Comment by Kaunaloa on September 26, 2008 at 7:02pm

well that makes things pretty clear -- HEY HAWAI'I VOTER, national unions are spending over $300 GRAND to try to convince you to NOT improve the state constitution. WHY would they do such a thing?!?!

Comment by Peter Kay on September 26, 2008 at 11:48am

Star Bulletin just published this piece on the Hawaii Alliance:

Anti-Con Con group gets mainland funds

Comment by Chuck Painter on September 26, 2008 at 11:40am

Today must be my ConCon day. I went to both itstimehawaii.com and hawaiialliance.org to get some answers about who is funding them and some feeling for special interest groups on the playing field.

I can't say that either site was particularly forthcoming.

That said, I did run across a link to the League of Women Voters who have always represented an objective, bi-partisan source of information for me.

Here's what they had to say:

http://www.lwv-hawaii.com/kaleohana/klh0709-amending.htm

Comment by Peter Kay on September 26, 2008 at 12:59am

Good question. There are no well-funded pro groups that I know of. There's the Lt. Gov's office and I believe the group itstimehawaii.com has made fundraising a component of their plan though I don't know how successful they have been.

Comment by Kaunaloa on September 25, 2008 at 6:06pm

seriously tho, the anti group has made there opening salvo. who will be the pro group to articulate the many potential benefits of a concon?

Comment by Kaunaloa on September 25, 2008 at 6:02pm

ah, the n.e.a. -- denying American kids a good education for ~30 years now ...
:-(