Vastly different views on this year’s ballot option of holding constitutional convention

The thought of holding a constitutional convention frightens some and would likely create “chaos,” two University of Iowa professors said this week.

A blogger and GOP activist welcomes it, saying lawmakers are “unresponsive to the will of the people.”

The option to have a convention to revise the constitution and propose amendments will be on the Nov. 2 ballot, as it is every 10 years, but there seems to be push for it this year because of the same-sex marriage ruling.

The measure would allow delegates to be elected by legislators and they could decide changes to the constitution on this year's hot issues – how judges are elected and same-sex marriage – as well as anything else.

Todd Pettys, law professor, said the field would be wide open.

“This is regarded as a frightening option,” Pettys said. “You wouldn't know what the delegates would propose. It's an extraordinary amount of power. Everybody would be able to vote on the proposals but when amendments are proposed through the Legislature, they are proposed one at a time and they are discussed vigorously. The amount of public airing is substantial.

“Through a convention, I'm not sure how public….how much public scrutiny (of process) there would be,” Pettys continued. “There's no specifics in the constitution about it. The fear is that people would adopt something without fully understanding it. How could you educate voters, especially if there are a number of amendments?”

Craig Robinson, of The Iowa Republican blog, doesn't share those fears. He said the legislators refuse to let the people of Iowa vote on the issue of marriage and a convention would “give people a route to go around legislators.”

People around the state started talking about in the Spring, Robinson said. There's no organized push, except by the Iowa Catholic Conference in reaction to the same-sex marriage ruling.

The conference, lobbyists to the Legislature, encourages their parishes to learn about issues important to the church and society, and get involved in the political process, according to web site.

Robinson on his blog conducted Voter-Consumer Research in July and found 42 percent favored a convention and 36 percent opposed it. The survey polled 500 likely people.

Timothy Hagle, associate professor of political science, said most times people ignore but the same-sex marriage issue has stayed the “hot” issue and holding a convention would be an alternative to the Legislature.

“The reason groups go to the courts because they haven't had success going to the Legislature, so if the Legislature doesn't want to do anything about this issue – go to the convention,” Hagle said. “The only problem is besides the marriage issue, there could be everything else (proposed). The saving grace is it still has to go before the voters.”

Hagle said it would be “chaos” because any issue could be on the table but there are a smaller number of people open to a convention than those unhappy with same-sex marriage decision. He doesn't believe it will pass.

A constitutional convention has only passed once in 1920 with 279,652 voting yes and 221,763 voting no, but it was never held, according to the Iowa Secretary of State's Office and an article in The Gazette archives.

The issue involved farmer cooperatives, Harrison “Skip” Weber, a well known Iowa journalist, explained in a Sept. 28, 1970 Gazette article. The Iowa Farm Bureau Federation didn't think it had the authority to establish co-ops. It was determined in the 1921 legislative session that co-ops could be set up without violating the provisions in the constitution and circumvented the problem.

There was no demand for the convention and the “issue withered on the political vine” without a convention being held, he wrote.

The only other serious campaign for a convention was in 1980 when Iowans for Tax Relief founder David Stanley wanted constitutional limits on government taxing power. Most Iowans, including then Gov. Robert Ray opposed the idea.

The convention question is No. 2, which follows the Iowa Water and Land Legacy Amendment, with is No. 2 on the ballot.