I have to admit I get a chuckle out of the Daily News joining the chorus calling for a constitutional convention in Pennsylvania (“Constitutional Convention: Road map to reform,” December 28). For some reason, the People Paper and a few others believe there is a real possibility that the magic of 1776 will be recreated by a gathering of involved Pennsylvanians who care about good government (the way the Daily News envisions it, of course).
I think such a convention would be a political freak show.
Let’s be realistic for a moment. What kinds of people are going to run for the chance to make these important changes? Remember, those who win the opportunity will be giving up several months away from their jobs and families. And I am confident that due to the Commonwealth’s fiscal condition, there will be little (if any) compensation for that work. Regardless, paying convention attendees and staff would go against the grain of what this particular public service is all about.
As the Daily News noted last week, there was a constitutional convention in the 1960s. I can actually remember that one and knew some of the delegates – many of whom were the very people you’d want to be protected from.
Nor would the Franklins and Jeffersons show up this time around. Instead, you’ll have a room full of tea baggers, Moveon.org types, pajama-clad bloggers, single-member advocacy groups, and special interests.
Special interests? The same people that the Daily News firmly believes are responsible for the rotting of the system? You better believe they’ll be represented. Like any other political act, it’s in their interest to affect a constitutional convention, and they will be able to make sure their delegates do not lose any paydays doing so.
I can picture the scene: crazies from the left and right debating sunshine provisions with representatives of corporate Philadelphia, trial lawyers, and labor unions. What fun. But who among them would represent the average Pennsylvanian?
Proponents of this idea will demand public financing of the elections or even that the sessions be conducted online so delegates can maintain normal lives throughout process. But that’s just window dressing for an unneeded storefront.
After all, whenever there is a problem, the kneejerk reaction is to call for meetings, hearings or commissions. There has been a blue ribbon run over the last several years, with middling results at best. There’s no reason to add another – no matter how momentous or well-intentioned – to the list.
Why not? Because our General Assembly has already made substantive changes in the way they operate. Just because it’s incremental – as change often is – doesn’t mean it’s not happening. The process currently is only “broken” insofar as elected officials need an excuse for a lack of accomplishment and the media insists it doesn’t work.
The fact is that we have a constitutional convention every two years in Pennsylvania when we elect our General Assembly. It’s wrong to paint these public servants with a broad brush of self-preservation and incompetence. The vast majority is dedicated to serving the best interest of their constituencies. That dedication is not determined by party affiliation.
In fact, reforming our system of election – which wouldn’t take a convention to do – would have more meaningful consequences for the Keystone State. The goal should not be to create bulletproof safe seats or punish malcontents; rather, a more common sense electoral process could be achieved by drawing districts that include whole counties and municipalities and common geographic and socioeconomic factors. If seats are drawn sensibly and competitively, primary elections won’t always determine the winners, and representatives will be more middle-of-the-road and responsive to the varied interests of their constituents.
Having said all of this, there is one rational reason to convene a constitutional convention: to generate revenue for Pennsylvania. And with the bizarre collection that would gather in some location for a convention, it has all the makings of a reality television show that could surely hold its own with Project Runway or the Real Housewives of some other state.
I bet even the Daily News would buy advertising on that show.
This column was originally published in the January 6, 2010 issue of the Philadelphia Daily News


















Greetings from Colorado! I’m bored to death at work so I decided to check out your website on my iphone during lunch break. I really like the info you provide here and can’t wait to take a look when I
get home. I’m surprised at how fast your blog loaded on my mobile .. I’m not even
using WIFI, just 3G .. Anyhow, superb site!
Thanks for your personal marvelous posting! I truly enjoyed reading it, you happen to be a great
author.I will be sure to bookmark your blog and will eventually come back later in life.
I want to encourage you to ultimately continue your great job, have a nice morning!
I like what you guys are usually up too. This type of clever work and coverage!
Keep up the wonderful works guys I’ve incorporated you guys to our blogroll.
I know this if off topic but I’m looking into starting my own weblog and was curious what all is needed to get setup? I’m assuming having a blog like yours would
cost a pretty penny? I’m not very web smart so I’m not 100% positive. Any recommendations or advice would be greatly appreciated. Appreciate it
Pingback: Website
Thanks. Just glanced via your post. did not have the time to read the whole thing. I subscribed to your rss feeds and trying forward to more.
Larry,……what happened here……did we delete my posting about Sasso being the Chairman of Corbett’s PAC and Sasso’s failure as counsel to the Archdiocese of Philadelphia to take action to protect our children from pedophilia??
Larry, what’s the deal!
if narrow vested interests like those of this site’s creator didn’t dominate in this could-be-great state we could hold a wide open convention, put the resulting proposals on line and have a rank order vote on them in a regularly scheduled election at very little added cost.
Not only aren’t there any Franklins or Jeffersons, there’s not even a Bob Casey Sr. (who chaired the constitutional convention in 68) who would be respected as an honest broker by all sides. So you’re right Larry, a con-con would be a mess. Too bad common-sense redistricting seems to be beyond the capacity of the lawmakers and justices.