Monday, April 24, 2017: (Uniondale, NY) – Siena Research Institute (“SRI”) released its latest poll on the pending November 7th vote on whether to hold a state Constitutional Convention. Support has dropped 10 percent in the past 11 months.
“As we get closer to the November 7th vote, New Yorkers are beginning to pay attention. As voters learn more they realize a conclave is nothing more than another government boondoggle that will spend taxpayer money to boost the government pensions of the delegates and line the pockets of the special interests,” stated Anthony M. Figliola, Co-Author of Patronage, Waste and Favoritism – A Dark History of Constitutional Conventions.
SRI recorded the LOWEST amount of support in 7 years (since June 2010). Support had been increasing in previous polls, although most respondents said they knew little to nothing about the convention. However, support has dropped 10 percent since May 2016 as voters have become more informed on the issue.
Jerry Kremer, Former Assembly Ways and Means Chairman who was in office during the 1967 Convention said, “There is no pressing public issue that is driving the call for another convention. There are certainly many issues that the legislature must debate, but voters are speaking up and they don’t believe that a Con Con is the vehicle to deliver the need reforms – that’s the job of the legislature.”
The poll clearly shows that the more voters learn about what a Con Con really is, they are leaning against it.
Media Contact: Anthony Figliola
Phone: (516) 663-5335
Email: AFigliola@empiregs.com
New York Voters should be aware of an important vote this November that will decide whether we have a costly state constitutional convention.
As Featured in the Long Island Press
By Anthony Figliola
On Nov. 7, the voters will make an important choice on whether to hold another state constitutional convention, which if approved would take place in April 2019. Voters beware, many of the groups advocating in favor of this ballot proposition are representing narrow interests, masked under the thin veil of good government.
Our state’s constitution requires that every 20 years, voters get the opportunity to choose whether or not to hold a constitutional convention. During the past 112 years we have held four conventions (e.g., 1894, 1915, 1938 and 1967) and their accomplishments are debatable. However, there is one indisputable fact that ties them together, they were carbon copies of a typical legislative session, driven by politics and tilted to benefit the political elite.
Unlike in years past, there is no pressing public issue that is creating a wave of support for a convention. In fact, the most recent Siena College poll shows that more than 71 percent of New Yorkers have no idea there is even an upcoming vote.
Leading up to the Convention of 1894, the country was mourning the loss of Presidents James Garfield and William McKinley, who were killed by an angry campaign workers who did not receive a government job. New Yorkers felt there was work to be done especially in passing civil service laws to end patronage and nepotism. In 1938, New York was recovering from a world war and the Great Depression, and many felt it was crucial to rebuild the national infrastructure and strengthen our laws.
Advocates for a convention will tell you that the only way to pass ethics reform is to have a convention, because the legislature can’t get it done. Not true, this year the legislature proposed an amendment that would to take away the pensions of legislators convicted of a felony. Many of these same proponents believe we need radical changes to our constitution, pushing to abolish the State Senate on the grounds that the Republicans who control the Senate with a group of independent Democrats are an impediment to getting progressive laws passed. Again, an empty argument. This month the legislature enacted, without a costly convention, an important progressive judicial reform that will raise the age of adult criminal prosecution from 16 to 18 years of age.
There is another group who wants to abolish the state, in a plan that is a better fit for a mini-series on AMC. A disparate group of land owners, who want to keep their tax dollars, seek to abolish the government and form regional frontiers with a figurehead, played by Pierce Brosnan, in the role of Governor for the regions.
All of these groups fail to recognize that past conventions have been riddled with rigged agendas and political patronage. In fact, in 1938 lobbyists were allowed stand on the convention floor and debate proposed amendments. Anyone who tells you that this will be a people’s convention is delusional. In 1967, 80 percent of the delegates were politically connected and 45 percent were current or former public officials who were able to collect a second salary, allowing them to double dip to boost their state pensions.
Constitutional conventions, which run concurrently with a regular legislative session, are not cost-effective. Not only are the delegates well paid, they get to hire staff. There are 204 delegate spots and they all need help. Administrative, legal, and research are just some of the staffing positions that have been filled in past conventions. Then you add per diems, food, transportation, lodging, and printed materials to the bottom line. You can even hire a special consultant or two.
The only stimulus for the economy is that the lobbyists can charge their clients another fee to represent them at the convention.
Thankfully, there is an alternative to this government boondoggle. During the last century, New Yorkers have amended their constitution 200 times by public referendum. Voters have shown time and time again that they can make intelligent choices and as such there is no reason to have a convention. The voters have elected 218 state officials, including the Governor, to represent their interests. The current democratic process allows the people to engage their government at the ballot box.
If the pro-convention advocates really want to change our laws, they can take a drive up to Albany like the rest of us and spend some time advocating for real reforms.
Anthony Figliola is Vice President of Empire Government Strategies and co-author of Patronage, Waste and Favoritism – A Dark History of Constitutional Conventions.
As Featured in Smithtown Matters
By Anthony Figliola
This year, one of the most important legislative issues that will confront Albany legislators will be to approve a ballot proposition slated for November 7, 2017, to hold a constitutional convention.
On its face, a convention makes sense given the many issues that have stalled in Albany’s black hole of bureaucracy over the years. The problem with this philosophy is that it ignores the history of past conventions and the powerful role that politics played in the process.
History has shown that a con con is nothing more than a carbon copy of a typical legislative session. In short, it’s a $335 million plus workforce development initiative for the politically connected.
Many good-government groups who have pushed for ethics and campaign finance reform in New York are keen to support a convention, because their efforts over the years have been thwarted by the culture of the status quo. Many reformers naively accept the premise that seizing on a possible vote for a New York Constitutional Convention (e.g., vote slated for November 7, 2017) will force the state legislature’s hand to pass meaningful reforms. In theory, it makes sense, but the one variable that will dilute this purist approach is politics. The same people who are impotent on the issue of reforms are the same folks who will set the rules, select candidate delegates and ultimately run the convention.
History shows us that while some worthy policies were developed and ratified by the voters, much of the conventions were riddled with rigged agendas and uncontrolled costs. It is important to note that in past conventions, elected officials, including state legislators, have served as delegates at the convention. These pols essentially “double dipped”, collecting two salaries that significantly boosted their government pensions.
Let’s not forget the lobbyists who love the idea of a conclave, so they can charge their clients another fee to represent them at the convention. The 1967 convention charged taxpayers more than $45 million ($335 million in today’s dollars) and very little was achieved that could not have been accomplished through a statewide referendum.
Constitutional conventions are not cost-effective. Not only are the politically connected delegates well paid, they get to hire staff. There are 189 delegate spots and they all need help. Administrative, legal, and research are just some of the staffing positions that have been filled in past conventions. Then you add per diems, food, transportation, lodging, and printed materials to the bottom line. You can even hire a special consultant or two.
Historians and legal scholars will point to the 1894 convention that brought us the “Forever Wild” amendment, which protects the Adirondacks from development or the 1938 convention that authorized public funds for low-income housing, all of which were important pieces of legislation. Other conventions in 1915 and 1967 produced nothing for the voters.
Legal scholars have also argued that a conclave could develop critical judicial reforms, such as streamlining the court system and adding an amendment that would guarantee legal aid in civil cases. These proponents have an opportunity every year during a regular legislative session to educate the public, in order to galvanize support for specific constitutional amendments to be brought to the voters.
In developing the convention rules, many supporters have stated that there will be checks and balances in the rule making process that will give the power to the people. History has proven that nothing could be farther from the truth.
It has been almost 80 years since a convention has produced any constitutional amendments, because politics has been the poison pill.
There is a less costly and more effective approach to changing our constitution and that is the public referendum process, which has successfully amended the constitution more than 200 times. In fact, the constitution has been amended seven times in the last few years using this process, which included the voters approving casino gambling.
Voters seeking good government solutions can’t afford the luxury of another convention.
As Featured in The Buffalo News
This year, one of the most important legislative issues that will confront Albany legislators will be whether to approve a ballot proposition slated for Nov. 7 to hold a constitutional convention.
On its face, a convention makes sense given the many issues that have stalled in Albany’s black hole of bureaucracy over the years. The problem with this philosophy is that it ignores the history of past conventions and the powerful role that politics played in the process.
History has shown that a constitutional convention is nothing more than a carbon copy of a typical legislative session. In short, it’s a $335 million-plus workforce development initiative for the politically connected.
Many good-government groups that have pushed for ethics and campaign finance reform in New York are keen to support a convention, because their efforts over the years have been thwarted by the culture of the status quo.
Many reformers naively accept the premise that seizing on a possible vote for a New York Constitutional Convention will force the State Legislature’s hand to pass meaningful reforms.
In theory, it makes sense, but the one variable that will dilute this purist approach is politics. The people who are impotent on the issue of reforms are the same folks who will set the rules, select candidate delegates and ultimately run the convention.
History shows us that while some worthy policies were developed and ratified by the voters, much of the conventions were riddled with rigged agendas and uncontrolled costs. It is important to note that in past conventions, elected officials, including state legislators, have served as delegates at the convention. These pols essentially “double dipped,” collecting two salaries that significantly boosted their government pensions.
Let’s not forget the lobbyists who love the idea of a conclave, so they can charge their clients another fee to represent them at the convention. The 1967 convention charged taxpayers more than $45 million ($335 million in today’s dollars) and very little was achieved that could not have been accomplished through a statewide referendum.
In developing the convention rules, many supporters have stated that there will be checks and balances in the rule-making process that will give the power to the people. History has proven that nothing could be further from the truth.
It has been almost 80 years since a convention has produced any constitutional amendments, because politics has been the poison pill.
There is a less costly and more effective approach to changing our constitution and that is the public referendum process, which has successfully amended the constitution more than 200 times. In fact, the constitution has been amended seven times in the last few years using this process, which included the voters approving casino gambling.
Voters seeking good government solutions can’t afford the luxury of another convention.
The editorial board’s desire to clean up what it describes as New York’s “cesspool of corruption” (“New Yorkers need to approve a convention,” Sept. 20) by holding a constitutional convention is laudable, but ill-advised.
Many well-meaning citizens believe that the best way to make changes to the state’s ethics laws would be to hold a convention. The problem with this philosophy is that it ignores the history of past con cons and the powerful role that politics played in the process.
History shows that while some worthy policies were developed and ratified by the voters, much of the conventions were political boondoggles. The last convention in 1967 produced nothing more than a path for the politically connected to collect another check to increase their government pensions, and the lobbyists loved it, because they could charge their client another fee for the convention. More than $45 million in taxpayer money ($320 million in today’s dollars) was spent and very little was achieved that could not have been accomplished through a statewide referendum.
Historians and legal scholars will point to the 1894 convention that brought us the “Forever Wild” amendment, which protects the Adirondacks from development or the 1938 convention that authorized public funds for low-income housing, all of which were important pieces of legislation. Other conventions in 1915 and 1967 produced nothing for the voters. Supporters of another conclave foolishly believe that the political leaders will give up an opportunity to participate in this convention and hand it to the people, in the spirit of passing ethics reform — “not going to happen.”
The most effective approach to changing our constitution has and always will be the public referendum process, which has successfully amended the constitution more than 200 times.
Mr. Morrongiello’s prescription to save upstate New York in his Jan. 5 Guest Viewpoint is admirable.
Civic participation is the cornerstone of our democracy. It is the reason why the founders of the great state of New York wrote into its constitution that residents be given a choice every 20 years to hold a constitutional convention.
Unfortunately, the idea of another costly convention is better in theory than in practice.
Political ideologies, backroom deals and personal agendas have ruled over New York’s constitutional convention process. The last conclave in 1967 produced nothing more than a path for the politically connected to collect another check to increase their government pensions. Millions in taxpayer dollars were spent and very little was achieved that could not have been accomplished through a statewide referendum.
We have amended our constitution more than 200 times through referendums voted on by the people. This is the most democratically efficient and economical way to change our constitution. In just the last few years, voters approved more than seven amendments.
Voters, don’t be fooled into supporting another convention. The only winners will be special interests and the losers will be us.
