The Case for a Rhode Island Constitutional Convention (Local Issues Edition):
Opening Up Government in the Ocean State
Feel free to check the entire blog archives from “Political Pulse” & “Salzillo Report” on the 2024 primary cycle, rural outreach, redistricting litigation, base dynamics, campaign organization, the current media landscape, the issues at stake, America’s political history, the progressive movement, the true story about Gina Raimondo, and much more.
Happy Juneteenth!
As always, Salzillo’s Two Cents has come out with another highly-recommended post. This time, David wrote an open letter to Sean O’Brien, the current president of the Teamsters Union. Labor will play an important role in the upcoming elections, so for those who are able to take a look…
Today though, I will speak to a more local issue: the Rhode Island Constitutional Convention and why voters in Rhode Island might approve a ballot initiative to establish it this time.
There has been a lot of talk about this constitutional convention proposal and what it could mean. To begin, it has no affiliation with the (rightly) controversial Article V push from many GOP states (and almost exclusively GOP states) to rewrite the U.S. Constitution to turn the clock back on many hot-button ideological issues.
Instead, it is the pursuit of a state constitutional convention for Rhode Island state government (and just Rhode Island state government). Many states, RI included, authorize voters to consider a state convention designed to update our state’s founding documents. In fact, every 10 years, we vote on whether to have a local constitutional convention.
This year, the Rhode Island Constitutional Convention is a potential opportunity for the people of Rhode Island to enshrine principles of clean government and transparency into our state constitution.
Rhode Island’s deep history of political corruption is one we have to face. While there have been some improvements, the darker sides of scandals still exists here. For that, look not further than the record of the historically unpopular and controversial House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello and his allies (most notably, disgraced Ray Gallison, Frank Montanaro Jr., Carlos Tobon, Cale Keable, Kenneth Marshall, John Carnevale, and a few others). That is not to forget the other local fiascos we have faced over the past 15 or so years, including how 38 Studios came to be.
Our government is certainly lacking in transparency as well. When the top SEC pension whistleblower in the country tells us that the state investment portfolio’s actuarial numbers are inaccurate, misleading, and potentially fraudulent, the people of this state deserve to know where the money is going. We should know exactly how much the state is paying to Point Judith Capital for its decade-long assets in our pension system. Those records, and others, should not be hidden by the General Treasurer’s office or any other state agency.
The same problem goes with my brother’s personal experiences in dealing with the RI Department of Education on the fate of city schools like Mt. Pleasant High. Their approach to “responding” to public records requests (i.e., complying with the Access to Public Records Act) is deeply insulting to us as former Providence Public School students ourselves. Secret government breeds corrupt government.
Unsurprisingly, Rhode Island also has had fiscally irresponsible government leadership. To be clear, this is not a Republican talking point either. Events like the Washington Bridge breakdown, the Eleanor Slater Hospital crisis, and our well-beloved IT system flops (UHIP, etc.) are easily preventable. Imagine where the hundreds of millions (and possibly billions) of dollars could have gone had these financial quagmires never occurred.
Finally, as much as I would like to see more elected Democrats everywhere, it does not make sense that Republicans only hold about 15 of 110+ General Assembly seats in a state where nearly 40% of eligible adults vote Republican. Even if you are a Democrat, this all too often results in an overwhelmingly conservative Democrat RI General Assembly. Ironically, that ensures that your average Rhody Democrat in the General Assembly does not truly represent the average Rhode Island Democrat in the state. Sometimes, it even means that conservative Democrats in our state redistrict to undercut some of the most popular Democrats. A glaring recent example was with my own State Senator Sam Bell, who was targeted by leadership, yet achieved two landslide victories in 2020 and 2022.
Looking at the big picture, Rhode Island’s representative government problem is part of a much larger national problem which is even worse in Republican states. Regardless, that does not justify the type of targeting via redistricting that is blatant here in Rhode Island.
A Rhode Island Constitutional Convention can help us implement the good government reforms that organizations like Common Cause RI, the RI ACLU, Operation Clean Government, and others have advocated for, reforms that state officials have been too willing to oppose or ignore (sometimes despite passionate support from veteran lawmakers).
For example, is it a radical idea to have public records transparency statutes enshrined in our state constitution like they are in so many other states? Is it radical to have an Inspector General independent watchdog to mitigate and prevent incidents like the Washington Bridge? Is it radical to give voters the power to approve the use of taxpayer dollars before it is put into projects like Tidewater Stadium, or some random video game company? Is it radical to have fair redistricting in our constitution, like good government groups in Ohio are trying to do? Is it radical to have campaign finance reform in this state? Is it radical to close the revolving door so state legislators don’t become court justices overnight (like Erin Lynch Prata)? How about restoring power to the Ethics Commission which was needlessly lost in 2009? Or eliminating the legislative grants?
In many cases, the proposals likely to gain any traction for inclusion in a state convention are very practical, common sense measures which this state should already have taken. As I said before, that problems exist in how our state government works line up well with my personal experience of our state government, and the personal experiences of many others. Our state should be more fiscally responsible and open.
Still, I know there are concerns about this convention based upon some of the controversies out of the last one from 1986. However, for what it’s worth, there is only so much change a state constitutional convention could conceivably make on issues like abortion or guns, or same-sex marriage protections. Since these issues gain support from almost all Democrats and a sizable amount of Independents and Republicans, no constitutional convention based on the will of the majority will endanger any of that.
Indeed, for those concerned about minority rule from this convention, any proposal from the Constitutional Convention has to be approved by voters in subsequent ballot initiatives to become part of the state constitution. Voters will have the ultimate say in what gets passed or not. Even in Republican states like Ohio, we have seen how that has scuttled any plans to impose radical abortion bans. And again, due to the unique politics of a largely Democratic state like Rhode Island, the Constitutional Convention issues should primarily encompass government reform issues, and maybe some others like education as a constitutional right or shoreline access guidelines. Majority opinion will rule the day on what is passed or not, including on these needed reforms to the state. Every voter in Rhode Island will be able to decide on these reforms one way or another.
Likewise, for those concerned about special interests influencing ballot measures, I do not think you are wrong to have a healthy skepticism. But the question is, is the status quo working any better for you? Or does the government influence of lobbyists like Bill Murphy, Stephen Alves, and the Petrarca Family, or Super PACs like Engage RI, require a constitutional overhaul of that status quo?
So what do you think?
Stay tuned for more developments.