Russ Diamond for Lt. Gov. | Convention Q&A

Founder & Chairman - PACleanSweep, 2005-2009 | Golden Dot Award - George Washington University, 2005 | Citizen of the Year - Philadelphia Inquirer, 2006
Public Service Achievement Award - Common Cause/PA, 2006 | Communicator of the Year - International Association of Business Communicators (Harrisburg), 2006

Dedicated to reforming state government through a limited constitutional convention, eliminating property taxes once
and for all, and defending Pennsylvanians from federal intrusion by enforcing the 10th Amendment from Harrisburg.

answers to basic questions regarding a constitutional convention for Pennsylvania

All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.

- Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; Article I Section 2

What is a constitutional convention?

A convention is one of three methods available to change Pennsylvania's Constitution. At a convention, delegates openly debate proposed changes to the document and make recommendations, subject to ratification by the voters.

The other two methods of changing the Constitution are by amendment. In the regular amendment process, a proposed change must be approved by a simple majority in two consecutive sessions of the legislature and then be ratified by the voters. This process can take up to five years to complete.

In the case of a major emergency in the Commonwealth, an amendment can be passed during only one session of the legislature, but a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate must approve it. A majority of voters must also ratify these emergency amendments at the ballot box.

A convention is usually called in response to some crisis in public confidence, be it internal or external to the workings of government. Pennsylvania is currently suffering from a severe crisis in confidence regarding the institutions of state government.

A convention can address problems that are impossible or unlikely to be solved using the regular legislative and amendment processes.

Do we need to change the Constitution?

Since the infamous pay raise of 2005, many Pennsylvanians have realized that portions of our Constitution are simply not being followed or enforced. Others have called for adding legislative term limits, changing the size of the legislature, providing for referendum and recall, modifying the way we select judges for appellate courts, and setting new guidelines for legislative redistricting, just to list a few ideas.

If citizens want to discuss these issues, a convention is the proper forum for doing so. One can only imagine the arduous task of trying to discuss such changes individually through an amendment process.

It could also be argued that state government is currently functioning under a cloud of suspicion. A convention would help clear the air so Pennsylvania government can regain the trust of citizens and focus on the business of governing the Commonwealth.

Has Pennsylvania held a convention before?

Yes, on five different occasions. Our first convention was held in 1776 in response to a request from the Continental Congress to all thirteen colonies in anticipation of declaring independence from England. Subsequently, conventions were held in 1790, 1837, 1873, and 1967 to update Pennsylvania's Constitution.

How is a convention assembled?

Although the original 1776 Constitution prescribed a method for calling a convention, that provision was removed at the 1790 convention. All subsequent conventions have been called by an act of the General Assembly, referred to as an enabling act.

Currently, the leading plans for such an enabling act are Senate Bill 340 and House Bill 1929. These two bills are virtually identical.

Do voters have any say in the matter?

Traditionally, voters have an opportunity to either approve or reject a call for a convention through a statewide referendum. Voters also elect the convention’s delegates.

The convention does not have the power to rewrite the PA Constitution. Rather, it only has the power to propose changes. Once the convention adjourns, voters have an opportunity to approve or reject any constitutional changes the convention proposes.

In 1790, however, the people of Pennsylvania were not given any opportunity to approve the convention, nor did they vote to adopt the proposed changes - the new Constitution was simply written and ratified by the General Assembly. This would not be appropriate today.

Because the PA Constitution is silent on the matter of a convention, all these details must be spelled out in an enabling act. SB340 and HB1929 include the three opportunities for voter control listed above.

Who would serve as delegates to a convention? How many delegates would serve?

This also depends on the enabling act. For instance, in 1790 the legislature itself served as the delegates. In 1837, Pennsylvanians elected one delegate from each state House district and one delegate from each state Senate district.

In 1873, there were 133 total delegates - three from each of the 33 existing state Senate districts, 28 at-large statewide delegates and a handful of additional delegates from the Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Scranton/Wilkes-Barre areas to balance for population differences at the time.

In 1967, there were 163 delegates. Three were elected from each of the state's 50 Senate districts. Twelve legislative leaders and the Lieutenant Governor, who all served in ex officio capacity with delegate voting rights, joined them. The 13 public officials also served as the convention's preparatory committee.

SB340 and HB1929 provide for three delegates from each of the fifty state Senate districts, for a total of 150 delegates.

Who would be eligible to be a candidate for delegate?

While the enabling acts for the 1837 and 1874 conventions did not specify the manner of nominating delegate candidates, the enabling act for the 1967 convention mandated that candidates were nominated by the local Democratic and Republican party committees. Other individuals could run, but they were required to collect the signatures of 500 voters on petitions and pay a fee.

SB340 and HB1929 provide for three delegates from each state Senate district. These candidates would be required to gather 100 signatures on a petition and pay a $100 filing fee to put their name on the ballot. They would not be appointed by political party bosses and would not have any party affiliation listed on the ballot.

Due to potential conflicts of interest, public officials and registered lobbyists would not be eligible to serve simultaneously as delegates to a convention under SB340 and HB1929, but those individuals are given a window of opportunity to withdraw from those positions in order to exercise their right as Pennsylvanians to run for a delegate position.

Is there any danger that a convention could get bogged down in controversial issues such as gun rights, abortion or same-sex marriage?

Only if a general, or unlimited, convention is held. SB340 and HB1929 provide for a limited convention designed to specifically avoid such divisive issues.

Pennsylvania's Constitution is neatly segmented into Articles, separating individual rights from the structures and powers of government. Most controversial social issues are based on the individual rights guaranteed (not granted) by Article I. The rest of the document, Articles II-XI, deals with the structures and powers of state government.

While Article I Section 2 of the PA Constitution guarantees our right to alter or reform our government, it says nothing about tinkering with individual rights. Individual rights are guaranteed by Article I, also known as the Declaration of Rights.

Further, Article I Section 25 declares that "everything in this article [Article I] is excepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate.”

As a body created by an act of the General Assembly and funded by public resources, a convention is a function of government. Any such convention that includes discussion of the provisions of Article I would be unconstitutional due to the language of Article I Section 25.

Therefore, it is wholly inappropriate to call a general convention that includes a opening up Article I in response to Pennsylvania’s current crisis in confidence. SB340 and HB1929 take Article I off the table and limit the convention’s scope to only a discussion of Articles II-XI.

Such a limitation is legal, constitutional, and enforceable.

What about other divisive partisan issues not included in Article I, such as a graduated income tax or school funding issues?

These and other typical policy issues, which are best discussed in the regular legislative process, could be avoided by requiring the convention's proposals be approved by a two-thirds majority of the delegates before being sent for voter approval. This would also help in reserving the convention’s time and effort for only those proposals able to clear a higher threshold of consensus.

SB340 and HB1929 both include this supermajority requirement.

Are there any uncertainties in holding a convention?

There are no guarantees for the outcome of any convention, but in today’s climate the people of Pennsylvania are in the proper mindset to tackle a convention with a willingness to thoughtfully deliberate on improving and reforming the institutions of government in Pennsylvania.

In 1873, heavy coverage of the convention by newspapers kept Pennsylvanians well informed of the proceedings. With today's modern communication capabilities, that attention would surely be more pronounced.

Ultimately, if the convention's proposals are not satisfactory to the majority of Pennsylvanians, they can simply vote to reject them - and the current provisions of the Constitution would remain in effect.

A limited constitutional convention called by a carefully crafted enabling act would be subject to court challenge if it oversteps the limitations imposed by the General Assembly and the voters. This legal cure would be available right up until the time of voter ratification.

The only real danger lies in not attempting to reform the institutions of state government and leaving in place a broken system that continues to fall short of fully protecting our rights and performing the core functions that serve as the reason governments are built in the first place.

As a citizen, what can I do to ensure a convention is conducted properly?

Pay attention and get involved! Read the bills!

Many of the most important questions regarding a convention would be answered in the General Assembly's enabling act. If an enabling act is not carefully crafted, a convention could have serious flaws and unintended consequences.

Even if an enabling act is rock solid, citizens must still pay close attention to all aspects of a convention. A convention is a very serious undertaking, as a revised Constitution could remain in effect for a century or more.

And remember that attempting to fix what's wrong with the institutions of government is not just our right, but also our duty.

What are the chances the General Assembly will approve an enabling act?

There is reason be optimistic about growing support for a convention within the legislature, but we must also take human nature into account. Those who currently hold power may be reluctant to relinquish any of it to a convention of citizens. Because some of the focus of a convention would be on the legislature itself, there is no doubt there will be legislators who resist.

The chances for a limited citizens’ convention increase exponentially with electoral pressure. A good question for every candidate running for state office is:

Do you believe in our right to alter or reform government guaranteed by Article I, Section 2 of the PA Constitution? If so, then do you also support our right to gather at a limited citizens’ convention?

Because of the current lack of faith in the institutions of state government, this should be the premiere campaign issue of 2010 in Pennsylvania. One newspaper has already proclaimed it will not endorse any legislative candidate who does not support a convention.

Download as PDF

Paid for by Russ Diamond for Lieutenant Governor.