A statewide constitutional convention is the only idea we've heard so far that promises a remedy for the mess that is the State Legislature in Albany.
Three years ago, the Brennan Institute issued a report saying our state's legislature was the most dysfunctional in the nation. Such a declaration was a call for action on reform, but not only has there been no reform, things have actually gotten worse.
The Senate power struggle fiasco last summer was the nadir of poor government. Some called it corrupt.
So the best alternative is to put reform in the hands of someone other than the well-paid legislators.
A call for a constitutional convention comes up every 20 years, beginning in 1957. Voters can choose whether they want to hold a convention.
In 1957, 1977 and 1997 voters rejected the idea for various reasons, as special interests campaigned to defeat the measure out of fear they would lose benefits.
But a special referendum to hold a convention out of sequence was approved in 1965.
That's what Republicans in the Assembly minority are trying to do now. If they can get enough support in the legislature, they will summon a referendum on a convention for 2012 instead of waiting until 2017.
An early convention would feature three delegates from each of the 62 Senate districts and 15 at-large delegates, for a total of 201. The delegates would be elected by the people of New York. Delegates would have to gather 1,000 signatures (10,000 for the at-large delegates) on petitions to get onto the ballot.
The Assembly Republicans, who want Democrats to join them, say they want all delegates to be non-politicians and non-lobbyists. The goal is a gathering of average New Yorkers who are fed up with the system and want to see real change.
Delegates would all be paid. A convention is estimated to cost between $12 million and $20 million. It would likely last anywhere from four to 12 months.
The delegates can attack the Constitution piecemeal, addressing any issue they feel needs mending. Term limits, length of terms, spending caps, property-tax systems, how legislation gets brought to the floor — all of those issues and more would be on the table. With a state budget of about $132 billion, the cost of the convention is a bargain. And savings would surely result.
The major concern of course, is that the convention itself would be infiltrated by special interests and it will wind up being just as inept as the legislature. We believe a vigilant electorate would ensure that wouldn't happen.
Unions are also concerned that the idea of holding a convention is nothing more than a chance to steal their pensions, which are guaranteed in the Constitution. With most of the lawmakers vested in the pension, it is doubtful that would happen.
In the end, the voters would get to decide on any changes the delegates divine.
We've opposed a convention in the past, fearing too much expense and too little change. Now, the situation has deteriorated to the point where a convention seems like the state's only hope for solvency and effective governing.
