People in the News

Home

People in the News

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal calls convention risky, unneccessary

“Our State Constitution is the bedrock of our civil rights and liberties. The convention proposal is a risky and costly process. The State Constitution is not a document to be rewritten carelessly. I believe that voters, if really informed about the risks of this proposal, will Vote No," Blumenthal said. "As a matter of policy and wisdom, I hope voters will reject this proposal this November. We should not consider changing liberties and fundamental guarantees without a careful process.”

He noted that the General Assembly has revised the constitution 30 times since 1965, including changes to the way judges are chosen; incapacitated governors are replaced; the elimination of the county-sheriff system; and the creation of a biennial rather than annual state budget.

"The message today is not simply 'vote no,' it is do it in the right way," Blumenthal said. "Do it by amendment if the constitution needs to be changed."

Constitutional Scholar Wesley Horton Opposes Convention

"...Wesley Horton, who specializes in constitutional law and has written a book on Connecticut’s constitution, said in a statement Wednesday “The purpose of a constitution, as opposed to a body of statutes, is to set forth the general framework and those fundamental principles for how a government should be run.”

The last Constitutional Convention in Connecticut took place in 1965, and was called to correct a deeply flawed system of apportioning representatives to the General Assembly which gave large cities such as New Haven and Bridgeport roughly the same number of house seats as small towns such as Union and Beacon Falls.

In his statement Horton said “There is no similar circumstance in Connecticut in 2008.”

“Without some overwhelming need for a constitutional convention, such a convention could easily be dominated by single-issue special interest groups,” he said. “If zealous groups to not get what they want from the legislature or the governor or the courts, they could put the issue to the convention.”

Horton warned that “If we think the Connecticut legislature is dominated by special interest groups, wait until Connecticut has a constitutional convention called, not because some major upheaval requires it, but because special interest groups band together to dominate it!” www.ctnewsjunkie.com, Debate On A Constitutional Convention Heats Up, by Christine Stuart | September 17, 2008, Posted to Election 2008

Jara Burnet, President, League of Women Voters

"We're believers in the old "if it's not broken" adage. The league believes that the Connecticut Constitution works well as our state's basic framework of representative government. We can't think of any serious governance issues that justify the time, expense and bluster of a constitutional convention where every issue — no matter how outlandish — would be fair game. If voters are disillusioned with the actions of our General Assembly, they should speak up — express their views to their state representatives and state senators, or elect new legislators. The league urges Connecticut voters to say no in November to a constitutional convention." Hartford Courant, Letter to the Editor, September 28, 2008

Robert Satter, retired Connecticut Superior Court Judge

“Ardent special interest groups are pushing to have the right of initiative written into the Connecticut Constitution – a formula for ill-conceived lawmaking that would wrest important policy considerations away from elected officials… It should not be adopted in Connecticut.”
Hartford Courant, Opinion Editorial, June 29, 2008

Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz

"I support our constitution as written," she said. "Any amendments or revisions can be made by the people's representatives in the General Assembly and then approved by a majority of voters." Associated Press, by Susan Haigh, June 27, 2008

Shelley Geballe, President, CT Voices for Children

“The state constitution is a pretty malleable document, and unless there’s a huge reason to open it up, it’s a bit like a Pandora’s box. To the extent there might be some latent frustration in the quality of representation – moneyed interests rather than the interests of plain old Jane and Joe – that’s supposed to change as a result of public financing. I think [public financing] deserves a shot to see if it alleviates those concerns.”
Stamford Advocate, 06/27/08, by Brian Lockhart

Lori Pelletier, Secretary-Treasurer of the CT AFL-CIO

“In our experience, it just doesn’t work. [The effort in support of a constitutional convention] is nothing more than smoke and mirrors to take away from what people vote on in November. They elect representatives. They have the right to come up to public hearings. They have the right to talk with their representatives. If they’re not doing their job, they should vote them out of office.” Hartford Courant, 06/27/08, by Susan Haigh/AP

John K. Currie, Letter to the Editor

“There is a move afoot in Connecticut to seek a constitutional convention. Your first gut reaction might be to support this move. Considered reflection, however, calls for a no vote in November. Judge Robert Satter [Commentary, June 29, "Why Voters Shouldn't Pass Laws"] was correct. The ballot initiative process is not a method to empower regular citizens. It is, rather, a system used by the traditionally powerful, the wealthy, to exert their dominance in the guise of a populist device. During the 1998 election cycle there was more than a quarter-billion dollars spent on initiatives and counterinitiatives!” “Tyranny Masked As Populism”, Hartford Courant, Letter to the Editor, July 3, 2008