Gov. Chafee is against a ConCon


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

chafee weed foxGovernor Lincoln Chafee is opposed to a constitutional convention, he told me today, because delegate districts “mirror” legislative House districts. This, he said, gives House leadership too much influence in the process.

“When I served on ’85-’86 convention, it was run by the speaker,” Chafee said in a phone interview today. His first elected office was as a delegate to the last concon 30 years ago.

“The trouble is that the delegates’ districts mirror House (district) boundaries,” he explained. “They just have a whole apparatus behind them. They have people to call in every district, that they call every two years. Sure you can beat the machine, but it’s hard.”

During the ’85-86 concon, Chafee said he saw firsthand how House leadership exerted power during the convention. Rep. Matt Smith, of Providence, was speaker at the time.

“It left me wide-eyed,” Chafee said. “We would have a long discussion, looking at what other states did, and after all that input one of the speaker’s loyal votes say Madame Chair, I move the question, and it would get voted down.”

He also said a concon in today’s political atmosphere could be too easily influenced by outside spending. “A new phenomenon since I served is all the money that comes on these issues.”

Chafee said during the ’85-86 convention, he was pushing for the same issues during the ’85-86 concon that he thinks still needs to be reformed about Rhode Island’s governmental structure: executive powers. That year, he helped implement 4 year terms for governor, though the legislature also won four year terms through the convention, he said. But they didn’t manage to pass a line item veto, something that he feels is still a critical reform for Rhode Island.

“The spotlight and the heat are on the executive, meanwhile the executive branch doesn’t have any power,” he said. “The speaker and the Senate president can fly under the radar. If all the focus is on the executive, give them some power.”

Chafee said such unbalanced powers between the executive and legislative branches surely plays into the state’s frequent turbulence. “If you want to know why Rhode Island lags the country in so many ways, look at our structure of government,” he said.

When he fought for more executive powers at the ’85-86 concon, he said his motives were more political. “It was mainly because Republicans could get elected governor,” he said, noting that he was a GOP member at the time. He said Gov. Ed DiPrete gave him a $100 donation, and he spent about $1,000 campaigning as a delegate. “The minimum is you need something with your name on it to leave with people. It costs $300 to print a palm card.”

The governor acknowledged previously supporting the idea of another constitutional convention. “I might have said I was in favor of it but not until we change the way we elect delegates.”

If there were to be one, he said he would push for a line item veto, as well as a unicameral legislature, which he said could work efficiently in a state of Rhode Island’s size. He said he wouldn’t likely campaign to be a delegate. “Been there, done that,” he told me.

Most municipal employees don’t live in Providence


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Providence public sector unions have been roundly rebuked for endorsing Buddy Cianci, both from Dan Lawlor on this blog and the Providence Journal editorial page. But how much do their endorsements matter in a mayoral election? The answer: not as much as when the city had a residency requirement.

pvd employees
Click on chart for larger version

While the local police, fire and teachers’ unions each endorsed Cianci, most of the members don’t live in Providence, a City Hall source confirmed.

Of the 3,516 Providence Public School Department employees, 37 percent live in the city (1,310). Only 22 percent of 469 fire department employees live locally and 21 percent of the 531-member police force lives in Providence. Of the 5,432 employees total city employees (including the school district) 36 percent live in the city, or 1,937.

And when it comes to the union executive boards that decide on political endorsements, the number of locals are equally stark. Of the 13 educators on the Providence Teachers Union Executive Board, only two live in the city, or 15 percent. Of the 11 executive officers of the fire fighters bargaining unit, only two live in the city, or 18 percent. And only one of the five members of the police union lives in Providence, 20 percent.

Jeremy Sencer, an elementary school and a member of the union’s executive board who lives in Cranston, cautioned me not to discount the significance of their endorsement simply because many members don’t live locally.

“While most of us don’t live there, we do spend a significant amount of time there, and we spend a lot of our time with the kids and families there,” he said. “We’re committed to the children and families of Providence, that puts us in a position to recommend, on education, what is good for Providence.”

Where does Common Cause stand on ConCon question?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Click on this infographic for a larger version.
Click on this infographic for a larger version.

On the November ballot, referendum Question 3 will ask voters; “Shall there be a convention to amend or revise the constitution?” While most people following Ocean State politics are focused on who will be the next governor of our state, or the next mayor of our capital city, question three bears watching too. The process for putting the referendum on the ballot every ten years was the result of a 1973 constitutional convention ballot initiative.

The first time the voters were presented with the new question (in 1984) they authorized a convention. The result was a two-year process that placed 14 questions on the 1986 ballot, eight of which were ratified by the voters. In 1994 and 2004 the voters rejected the referendum and no conventions were held as a result. Our organization, Common Cause Rhode Island, opposed the last two referenda but in 2014 we are not taking a position. Quite frankly, there are too many compelling arguments for and against a convention this time. Just a cursory review shows both sides to have compelling arguments.

Supporters of a convention point to important constitutional changes that they assert are needed in our state as the impetus for their efforts. They also rightfully point out that many of these reforms that limit legislative power could be much more difficult to achieve through the typical process whereby the General Assembly puts proposed constitutional amendments it would like on the statewide ballot.

Opponents of a convention point to the many important changes that have been put on the ballot by the legislature; including Separation of Powers, downsizing the legislature, elimination of the much abused legislative pensions, merit selection of judges, etc. They argue that a convention will be a creature of the legislature given that the election of delegates is based on state legislative districts, and that in 1986 many of them had deep ties to members of the General Assembly.

Opponents of a convention express legitimate concerns about the possibility that such a gathering might put restrictions on important civil rights and liberties up to a popular referendum. They point to amendments from 1986 that would have put restrictions on abortion rights (which didn’t pass) and imposed restrictions on bail for certain drug offenses (which did pass).

Supporters point to the fact that the people must approve any changes to the Rhode Island constitution that are placed on the ballot by a convention, and that the voters overwhelmingly rejected new restrictions on abortions in 1986. They argue that the U.S. Constitution contains sufficient protections for civil rights and liberties, and that those cannot be abrogated by the a state constitution.

We encourage the voters of Rhode Island to look closely at the arguments made against a convention by Citizens for Responsible Government, and for having a convention by Renew RI. Both coalitions have already been spending considerable resources to make their respective point of view heard. No doubt the coming weeks will see even more arguments by both sides of this question.

Common Cause is engaging a different type of education, one that is not focused on persuading anyone about the merits or dangers of a convention. Rather we are trying to explore what a convention might look like by digging into the archives from the 1980s and other sources. Here are a few quick facts:

There were an extraordinary 558 candidates for the November 5, 1985 election of 100 delegates to the constitutional convention. That election resulted in only 96,538 eligible voters casting a ballot. The convention held 11 statewide public forums and received over 1000 comments. After that they held 111 substantive committee meetings and took testimony at 34 public committee hearings. The result was 322 resolutions introduced by the delegates and vetted through six substantive committees. Fifty-six of the resolutions were debated in 10 plenary sessions. The result was 26 resolutions that passed and were consolidated into the 14 ballot questions proposed in 1986.

There is much more to learn about the 1986 convention. The Common Cause website contains five hours of video from a March conference we hosted with Roger Williams University School of Law, the Hassenfeld Institute for Public Leadership at Bryant University, and the League of Women Voters or Rhode Island. Included are talks by Professors Alan Tarr and Robert Williams from the Center for State Constitutional Studies at Rutgers University, perhaps the two leading authorities on state constitutions. Other materials we have added include information about the campaign finance from the election of delegates.

While the candidates you vote for on November 4th may be in office for four or eight years, changes to our state’s constitution may last for generations. In the coming weeks we hope you take the time to become educated about Question 3 and make sure on Election Day to go down the ballot and make your voice heard on this issue, no matter where you stand.