July 5, 2006

On Wednesday, July 12th, the Legislature is slated to hold a Constitutional Convention, in which the Senate and House sit together in a Joint Session to vote on proposed amendments to the state's Constitution.

There are currently 20 amendments under consideration. All amendments to the Constitution must be passed by the Legislatures in two consecutive sessions, after which they are put to the public for a vote. If they are approved by a majority of the voters, they are added to the Commonwealth’s Constitution. The Constitutional Convention in May was adjourned without voting on any of the matters on the calendar. It is possible that the same course of events could take place on the 12th. Proponents of various amendments are calling for votes on their items before adjournment.

There are two paths by which amendments can be proposed. First, legislators may file amendments through the regular bill-filing process. These are called legislative amendments. Second, citizen groups can advance amendments through the initiative petition process. Amendments filed through the legislative process require a majority vote in two consecutive legislative sessions in order to be put on the ballot for final approval of the voters. Amendments filed through the initiative petition process only require 50 votes in the two sessions to make it to the ballot for approval from the voters. For this reason, supporters of amendments that fail in the legislative amendment form will sometimes try to bring the matters forward through the initiative petition process, where they only need 50 rather than 101 votes to pass through the Legislature.

There are currently two amendments, one legislative amendment and one initiative petition amendment, that received favorable votes in the Constitutional Convention in the 2003-2004 session. Both of these amendments would thus be on the ballot this November if they receive favorable votes in this year’s Legislative session. The first of these amendments stipulates that the Legislature must appropriate a certain amount of money to the "Rainy Day" fund each year. Supporters of the proposal argue that it will ensure that the "Rainy Day" fund remains a reliable source of cash during years of difficult fiscal conditions. Opponents argue that putting this provision into the Constitution rather than just in law could hamstring the Legislature in crisis situations, such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters, or epidemics like avian flu that could require substantial outlays of emergency money. This amendment, filed through the legislative process, would need a majority vote to advance to the voters.

The second amendment stipulates that the Legislature and Governor must pass laws that would ensure universal health care to all residents in Massachusetts. Because this amendment went through the initiative petition process and received 50 votes in the 2003-2004 session, it needs only 50 votes in this session to be put on the ballot for voter approval.

In addition to these two amendments that are up for their second vote, there are 18 proposals that are on the Joint Session calendar for the first time. If approved by the Legislature this session, the proposals would then move to the calendar for the Constitutional Convention in the 2007-2008 session for consideration. If they were to receive favorable votes in both the current and the next legislative sessions they would be on the ballot. The majority of these amendments seek to make changes to the state’s election and campaign laws.

Two amendments propose to change the way Legislative districts are drawn. Currently, the Legislature itself draws the districts. One amendment would give this responsibility to an independent commission. This amendment is a legislative amendment filed by Senator Richard Moore. Fearful that it would not garner a support of the majority, supporters of the amendment circulated an initiative petition version this fall, but were unable to gather sufficient signatures to move it to the next stage in the process. A second amendment filed by the Republican Minority Leader of the House Bradley Jones stipulates that redistricting must be determined by a "bi-partisan", rather than "independent", commission, as the first amendment states.

There are two different legislative amendments establishing the right to vote by absentee, or mail-in, ballot. Two amendments, also both legislative, increase the length of the term of State Representatives and Senators from 2 to 4 years. Four amendments would change the process for filling office vacancies, one in the Governor’s Council, one for all Constitutional offices, one of the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, and the fourth for the Legislature in the event of a mass attack or catastrophe that left more than 1/3 of the Senate or House seats vacant. One amendment changes the process for determining the summary of ballot initiatives that appears in the voter information pamphlet. One would change the process for certifying judges, and a one would create a structure of county government. Another legislative amendment seeks to strengthen the initiative petition process by prohibiting the Legislature from changing any laws implemented through this process without the express consent of 10 of the original signers of the initiative petition. Currently, the Legislature can repeal laws enacted through the initiative petition process.

There is also an amendment written in response to the recent United States Supreme Court ruling on eminent domain rights. This amendment states that taking property or land for the purpose of economic development does not count as a "public use" and is thus restricted under the eminent domain provisions of the Constitution.

Most controversial are the two amendments establishing marriage as the union between one man and one woman. One is a legislative amendment, the other an initiative petition amendment. In September, the Legislature voted 157 to 39 to defeat an amendment that established marriage as between one man and one woman and included the provision for civil unions. This amendment had been approved in the 2003-2004 session by a vote of 105 to 92, but was then defeated in September. The current amendments establishing marriage as between one man and one woman, without the civil union provision, are up before the constitutional convention for the first time. One needs a majority vote to proceed, the other 50 votes.