View Mobile Site

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos


What's the best approach to reform?

Posted: October 30, 2009 6:31 p.m.
Updated: November 1, 2009 4:55 a.m.
A camel is a horse designed by a committee. Imagine 450 politically appointed individuals trying to revise or re-write California's state constitution and the result will be more bizarre than Frankenstein's creation. It will contain provisions to accommodate the numerous special interests who will twist and turn this document into a larger quagmire than what we have today.

The U.S. Constitution, on the other hand, was drafted in sessions attended by 55 delegates and eventually signed by 39. With few amendments, it has stood as the core law of the land for more than 200 years.

What did our founding fathers bring to the table that we lack today? They were men of vision with a purpose to create a nation unlike any in existence at that time, a democratic republic. Great principles like balancing the power of an executive, legislative and judicial branch of government - the golden triangle.

We definitely need a better state constitution to redefine the roles and responsibilities of our governing body, to make them more efficient and responsive and to better protect individual liberties. But we need to approach this task with a similar efficiency and focus of purpose as our founders did in 1787.

Consider this carefully when an option is chosen to host a constitutional convention and ask: Will the result be better or worse than what we have today?

You'll conclude that a delegation of 450 disparate special interests is not the approach to follow.


Commenting not available.
Commenting is not available.


Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...