California Senate Majority Leader Endorses Constitutional Convention

"If Madison was right about the need for well-functioning legislative bodies, and if society is losing them, then we would expect to see signs of the twin threats of which Madison warned - chaos­ and tyranny. Disturbingly, we do see those signs today."

These words were written by the Majority Leader of the California State Senate in a paper entitled, "The Dangers of Government Gridlock and the Need for a Constitutional Convention."

The Senate Majority Leader in question was Barry Keene and the year was 1992.

But this warning could easily grace the editorial pages of today as the state's leaders quaver on the edge of an even wider budget chasm and as the tide of discontent with the political status quo rises ever higher.

The familiarity of Keene's concerns - and he wasn't alone - belies the notion that our current problem are due to a recent rise in political polarization or a uniquely venal set of public officials. In fact, a constitutional revision commission was convened in the mid 1990s, though its sensible bipartisan recommendations were ignored by a state that was able to coast through a few more years of denial fueled by the tech and housing booms.

But after these gold rushes, we find ourselves in even more dire straits because the root causes of our problems will not go away for all of our wishing. In Keene's words:

"Some people argue that the problems of government are personal rather than structural. They say that our leaders do not lead, do not care or are crooks. But those charges beg the question - why do even the best people in government accomplish to little? The reasons are partly societal, as mentioned, partly attitudinal, as I will note, but mainly structural."

Some of the problems he identifies are endemic to the U.S. Constitutional system as a whole:

"The U.S. and California constitutions invite voters to elect legislative majorities of one philosophy and chief executives of another philosophy. The voters accept the invitation regularly. Enacting policy that moves in one direction, while implementing it in the opposite, virtually guarantees stalemate."

 

 

 

 

Conventional wisdom would suggest that our political problems primarily result from California-specific policy straitjackets we have buckled ourselves into - such as Propositions 13 and 98. But the current budget standoff between a Republican governor and Democratic legislature is just politics as usual in the checked and balanced American system.

Thad Kousser, Professor of Political Science at the University of California at San Diego made this exact point about divided government and gridlock in his presentation at a forum that the New America Foundation hosted on constitutional reform. It is also echoed within a paper from last fall by Eric McGhee of the Public Policy Institute of California on "Redistricting and Legislative Partisanship."

But as Keene saw then - and as many are observing now - some of our structural problems, if not entirely unique, are magnified dramatically in California. An excellent example is our extraordinary abuse initiative process. As Keene explain, the sentiments that have lead Californians to develop these patterns are understandable but these actions are ultimately self-defeating:

"The public sees that the state government is stalemated. People turn to initiatives that, with all of their failings, have the one apparent virtue the Governor and the Legislature often lack - they at least accomplish something. But in doing so, they drive the regular policymakers from the decisionmaking field; the initiatives' special-interest sponsors lock them into the constitution, or into initiative statutes that the Governor and Legislature generally cannot change in response to new circumstances or new public demands. Government becomes even more stalemated."

Many of solutions to this stalemate advanced by Keene would also look very familiar to the reformers of today. He advocates for better campaign finance laws, a streamlined and simplified constitution, and an end to incumbent-oriented redistricting.

California did managed to constructively address the last of these issues through the success of Proposition 11 last year. The campaign finance system, though, has become even more embarrassingly perverse since then; the constitution even more bloated and trivialized.

Perhaps, therefore, we will put in place some of the more fundamental changes Keene recommends including the restoration of political parties, perhaps even within a parliamentary system of government. My colleague Mark Paul and I have also recommended sweeping reforms such as the implementation of full representation within legislative elections. And we're not afraid of parties.

But beyond endorsing specific reforms both incremental and radical, the punchline of Keene's piece is his call for a constitutional convention:

"The structural roadblocks to legislative decisionmaking also prevent the Legislature from enacting most constitutional reform. This is why we need a constitutional convention in California and perhaps in other states."

Over the course of the past year, the Bay Area Council, a group of 500 CEOs, has issued another clarion call for constitutional reform. Some have expressed concern that the convention would get caught up in debates about social issues. Keene spoke to these concerns compellingly saying:

"The risk of a runaway state convention is minor, compared with the near-certainty of continued paralysis without one."

Californians are waking up to the need for fundamental structural reform. But there is no guarantee that they will have the right leadership to make these vitally necessary changes or the wherewithal to see the process through to its conclusion. Some still dither, worried about sacred cows that artificially distort tax rates or perpetually lock in funding for specific programs. But until we all let go of our policy prejudices, take a leap of faith with each other, and fix the structural problems that ail the state, things will continue to get worse. Barry Keene saw it in 1992; organizations like the Bay Area Council, the New America Foundation, California Forward and the William C. Velasquez Institute see it today.

Or, on the other hand, we may live in denial for a few more years; after all, our once great state, was once very, very great and has not yet completely rotted to the core.