[et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ admin_label=”Section Header” fullwidth=”on” specialty=”off” _builder_version=”3.17.5″ next_background_color=”#000000″ global_module=”145″][et_pb_fullwidth_header global_parent=”145″ _builder_version=”3.0.89″ text_orientation=”center” header_fullscreen=”on” header_scroll_down=”on” image_orientation=”center” background_layout=”light” content_orientation=”center” custom_button_two=”off” button_two_icon_placement=”right” custom_button_one=”off” button_one_icon_placement=”right” title_font=”|700|||||||” subhead_text_align=”center” subhead_font=”|700|||||||” background_image=”https:\/\/hawaii.concon.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/07\/HawaiiStateCapitol.jpg” background_color=”rgba(255, 255, 255, 0)” button_one_text_size__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_text_size__hover=”null” button_two_text_size__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_text_size__hover=”null” button_one_text_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_text_color__hover=”null” button_two_text_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_text_color__hover=”null” button_one_border_width__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_border_width__hover=”null” button_two_border_width__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_border_width__hover=”null” button_one_border_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_border_color__hover=”null” button_two_border_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_border_color__hover=”null” button_one_border_radius__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_border_radius__hover=”null” button_two_border_radius__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_border_radius__hover=”null” button_one_letter_spacing__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_letter_spacing__hover=”null” button_two_letter_spacing__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_letter_spacing__hover=”null” button_one_bg_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_bg_color__hover=”null” button_two_bg_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_bg_color__hover=”null”]<\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_fullwidth_header][et_pb_fullwidth_post_title global_parent=”145″ _builder_version=”3.17.5″ categories=”off” comments=”off” featured_image=”off” disabled_on=”on|on|on” disabled=”on” \/][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ prev_background_color=”#000000″][et_pb_row][et_pb_column type=”1_4″][\/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_2″][et_pb_text _builder_version=”3.17.5″]<\/p>\n
In print and TV ads, Constitutional Convention opponents have been claiming that the cost of voting yes for a state constitutional convention on Nov. 6 would be too high. Consider the\u00a0<\/span>print ad<\/span><\/a>\u00a0launched by Preserve Our Hawaii, the leading No Coalition, in the Sunday edition of the October 14\u00a0Honolulu Star-Advertiser<\/em>. Run on three different pages, its text reads:<\/span><\/p>\n If we can\u2019t afford to repair public facilities, why spend $55 Million on ConCon? Vote \u2018No!\u2019 on the constitutional convention ballot question.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n In the same edition, the No Coalition\u2019s\u00a0<\/span>leading spokesperson<\/span><\/a>\u00a0from its last campaign in 2008 echoes the same message in an op-ed:<\/span><\/p>\n The estimated cost of a Hawaii Constitutional Convention (ConCon), if approved by voters at the Nov. 6 election is $56 million. Yes, that\u2019s right: $56 million\u2026. Are there any changes to our Constitution worth this amount of tax dollars at this time? I conclude the answer is a resounding NO.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n A\u00a0<\/span>TV ad<\/span><\/a>, launched on October 7, echoes the same message.\u00a0 So do\u00a0<\/span>Multiple print and TV ads<\/span><\/a>during the last campaign against a convention in 2008.<\/span><\/p>\n The $55 million figure being promoted by Preserve Our Hawaii is highly controversial.\u00a0 Hawaii\u2019s last convention in 1978 cost $2.03 million. In current dollars, that sum would be $7.7 million. Preserve Our Hawaii hasn\u2019t cited a source but is presumably working from the Legislative Reference Bureau\u2019s 2008 report requested by the Legislature\u2019s leadership to provide ammunition to convention opponents. That report estimated that in 2012 dollars a convention would cost between $7.5 million and $48.8 million. The $55 million figure presumably extrapolates from the upper bound $48.8 million figure. Even then, Preserve Our Hawaii is only quoting the report\u2019s upper bound. A competing 2008 report published by a workgroup organized by Hawaii\u2019s Lt. Governor found the Legislature\u2019s cost estimates wildly inflated.<\/span><\/p>\n But costs per se mean nothing.\u00a0 To mean something, they must be compared to something else.\u00a0 The comparisons that the No Coalition\u2019s political research firms have tested as helping their campaign include comparisons to the average Hawaiian\u2019s personal income (far less than a convention\u2019s cost) and some of the most popular government expenditures, such as fixing potholes and paying for more teacher supplies.<\/span><\/p>\n But many other potential cost comparisons could be made.\u00a0 One category of such comparisons compares aggregate government revenue to the average individual\u2019s income. Total government spending in Hawaii is approximately\u00a0<\/span>$14 billion a year<\/span><\/a>\u00a0or $140 billion over the ten-year period between convention referendums.\u00a0 With this comparison, a convention\u2019s cost becomes comparable to a rounding error.<\/span><\/p>\n Another comparison category is a large individual project.\u00a0 For example, the current estimated cost of Hawaii\u2019s rail project is approximately\u00a0<\/span>$10 billion<\/span><\/a>, of which the cost of a convention would be approximately one thousandth of its cost, or about 100 feet of the project\u2019s length.<\/span><\/p>\n Another category is state government waste.\u00a0 Americans believe their state government wastes about\u00a0<\/span>42% of every tax dollar<\/span><\/a>, which would be more than $50 billion between the decennial convention referendums.\u00a0 A\u00a0<\/span>poll<\/span><\/a>\u00a0asked Hawaii voters: \u201cHow well do you feel State government efficiently spends our tax dollars?\u201d 57% replied \u201cnot well.\u201d If a convention reduced government corruption and its resulting inefficiency by only 1% over a decade, it would have more than a 5,000% return on investment.<\/span><\/p>\n My own favorite category is the cost of a government without democratic checks & balances.\u00a0 Doing away with costly checks & balances, including the two branches of the legislature, an independent judiciary, and local elected government, would result in a single elected state official. Just think of all the potholes we could fix if we got rid of all those wasteful democracy enhancing expenditures!\u00a0 Indeed, when dictator Benito Mussolini took over Italy in the 1920s, that\u2019s what he promised: massive public works! (Note: although the Legislature loves to issue reports on a convention\u2019s cost, I haven\u2019t been able to find a comparable report on its own costs.)<\/span><\/p>\n Of course, most Hawaii residents would recognize that reducing democratic accountability institutions to this bare minimum\u2014no matter how much money it would save\u2014would be penny wise and pound foolish because democratic accountability costs money.\u00a0 The same can be said for the democratic accountability a convention provides, which is why Hawaii\u2019s Framers included this legislative bypass mechanism in Hawaii\u2019s Constitution. Hawaii\u2019s Framers understood that it was essential to provide a mechanism to allow the people to bypass the State Legislature\u2019s gatekeeping power over state constitutional amendment. In comparison to the cost of Hawaii\u2019s other democratic accountability institutions, a convention\u2019s cost would be a rounding error.<\/span><\/p>\n Yet another category is the value of passing a specific popular amendment that the Legislature won\u2019t pass.\u00a0 For example, how much would the people be willing to spend to pass state legislative term limits or the citizen initiative?\u00a0 Would they be worth the cost of Hawaii\u2019s last convention in 1978; that is, $7.8 million in today\u2019s dollars?<\/span><\/p>\n The list of such alternate comparisons is endless. The key point is that any discussion of a convention\u2019s costs without a thoughtful discussion of its potential benefits is inherently misleading.\u00a0 Moreover, a good faith discussion of potential benefits should not focus on fixing potholes but on a convention\u2019s potential to help fix Hawaii\u2019s democracy.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Of course, it is in the No Coalition\u2019s interest to focus on a convention\u2019s potential costs rather than benefits.\u00a0 Accordingly, its ad compaigns over recent decades have refused to acknowledge, let alone discuss in good faith, why Hawaii\u2019s Framers created the convention process to propose popular democratic reforms adverse to the Legislature\u2019s institutional self-interest.<\/span><\/p>\n As the No Coalition\u2019s ad campaign against a convention gathers steam in the coming weeks, observers should be asking themselves: is it promoting the right cost comparison? And what exactly is it that Big Labor and Big Business, the key financiers and organizers behind the No Coalition, fear from a convention?\u00a0 Might it be that the costs they most fear, such as a reduction of their control over the State Legislature, might actually benefit the great majority of Hawaii?<\/span><\/p>\n LINK:\u00a0<\/span>Articles by J H Snider PhD<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n Source:<\/strong> Snider, J.H.,\u00a0The Advertised Cost of a Constitutional Convention<\/a>,\u00a0Hawai\u2019i Free Press<\/em>, October 17, 2018. Also\u00a0published<\/a>\u00a0in\u00a0The Garden Island<\/em>\u00a0on October 18, 2018.<\/p>\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Published in The Garden Island and Hawai`i Free Press<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":" In print and TV ads, Constitutional Convention opponents have been claiming that the cost of voting yes for a state constitutional convention on Nov. 6 would be too high. Consider the\u00a0<\/span>print ad<\/span><\/a>\u00a0launched by Preserve Our Hawaii, the leading No Coalition, in the Sunday edition of the October 14\u00a0Honolulu Star-Advertiser<\/em>. Run on three different pages, its text reads:<\/span><\/p> If we can\u2019t afford to repair public facilities, why spend $55 Million on ConCon? Vote \u2018No!\u2019 on the constitutional convention ballot question.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote> In the same edition, the No Coalition\u2019s\u00a0<\/span>leading spokesperson<\/span><\/a>\u00a0from its last campaign in 2008 echoes the same message in an op-ed:<\/span><\/p> The estimated cost of a Hawaii Constitutional Convention (ConCon), if approved by voters at the Nov. 6 election is $56 million. Yes, that\u2019s right: $56 million\u2026. Are there any changes to our Constitution worth this amount of tax dollars at this time? I conclude the answer is a resounding NO.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote> A\u00a0<\/span>TV ad<\/span><\/a>, launched on October 7, echoes the same message.\u00a0 So do\u00a0<\/span>Multiple print and TV ads<\/span><\/a>during the last campaign against a convention in 2008.<\/span><\/p> The $55 million figure being promoted by Preserve Our Hawaii is highly controversial.\u00a0 Hawaii\u2019s last convention in 1978 cost $2.03 million. In current dollars, that sum would be $7.7 million. Preserve Our Hawaii hasn\u2019t cited a source but is presumably working from the Legislative Reference Bureau\u2019s 2008 report requested by the Legislature\u2019s leadership to provide ammunition to convention opponents. That report estimated that in 2012 dollars a convention would cost between $7.5 million and $48.8 million. The $55 million figure presumably extrapolates from the upper bound $48.8 million figure. Even then, Preserve Our Hawaii is only quoting the report\u2019s upper bound. A competing 2008 report published by a workgroup organized by Hawaii\u2019s Lt. Governor found the Legislature\u2019s cost estimates wildly inflated.<\/span><\/p> But costs per se mean nothing.\u00a0 To mean something, they must be compared to something else.\u00a0 The comparisons that the No Coalition\u2019s political research firms have tested as helping their campaign include comparisons to the average Hawaiian\u2019s personal income (far less than a convention\u2019s cost) and some of the most popular government expenditures, such as fixing potholes and paying for more teacher supplies.<\/span><\/p> But many other potential cost comparisons could be made.\u00a0 One category of such comparisons compares aggregate government revenue to the average individual\u2019s income. Total government spending in Hawaii is approximately\u00a0<\/span>$14 billion a year<\/span><\/a>\u00a0or $140 billion over the ten-year period between convention referendums.\u00a0 With this comparison, a convention\u2019s cost becomes comparable to a rounding error.<\/span><\/p> Another comparison category is a large individual project.\u00a0 For example, the current estimated cost of Hawaii\u2019s rail project is approximately\u00a0<\/span>$10 billion<\/span><\/a>, of which the cost of a convention would be approximately one thousandth of its cost, or about 100 feet of the project\u2019s length.<\/span><\/p> Another category is state government waste.\u00a0 Americans believe their state government wastes about\u00a0<\/span>42% of every tax dollar<\/span><\/a>, which would be more than $50 billion between the decennial convention referendums.\u00a0 A\u00a0<\/span>poll<\/span><\/a>\u00a0asked Hawaii voters: \u201cHow well do you feel State government efficiently spends our tax dollars?\u201d 57% replied \u201cnot well.\u201d If a convention reduced government corruption and its resulting inefficiency by only 1% over a decade, it would have more than a 5,000% return on investment.<\/span><\/p> My own favorite category is the cost of a government without democratic checks & balances.\u00a0 Doing away with costly checks & balances, including the two branches of the legislature, an independent judiciary, and local elected government, would result in a single elected state official. Just think of all the potholes we could fix if we got rid of all those wasteful democracy enhancing expenditures!\u00a0 Indeed, when dictator Benito Mussolini took over Italy in the 1920s, that\u2019s what he promised: massive public works! (Note: although the Legislature loves to issue reports on a convention\u2019s cost, I haven\u2019t been able to find a comparable report on its own costs.)<\/span><\/p> Of course, most Hawaii residents would recognize that reducing democratic accountability institutions to this bare minimum\u2014no matter how much money it would save\u2014would be penny wise and pound foolish because democratic accountability costs money.\u00a0 The same can be said for the democratic accountability a convention provides, which is why Hawaii\u2019s Framers included this legislative bypass mechanism in Hawaii\u2019s Constitution. Hawaii\u2019s Framers understood that it was essential to provide a mechanism to allow the people to bypass the State Legislature\u2019s gatekeeping power over state constitutional amendment. In comparison to the cost of Hawaii\u2019s other democratic accountability institutions, a convention\u2019s cost would be a rounding error.<\/span><\/p> Yet another category is the value of passing a specific popular amendment that the Legislature won\u2019t pass.\u00a0 For example, how much would the people be willing to spend to pass state legislative term limits or the citizen initiative?\u00a0 Would they be worth the cost of Hawaii\u2019s last convention in 1978; that is, $7.8 million in today\u2019s dollars?<\/span><\/p> The list of such alternate comparisons is endless. The key point is that any discussion of a convention\u2019s costs without a thoughtful discussion of its potential benefits is inherently misleading.\u00a0 Moreover, a good faith discussion of potential benefits should not focus on fixing potholes but on a convention\u2019s potential to help fix Hawaii\u2019s democracy.\u00a0<\/span><\/p> Of course, it is in the No Coalition\u2019s interest to focus on a convention\u2019s potential costs rather than benefits.\u00a0 Accordingly, its ad compaigns over recent decades have refused to acknowledge, let alone discuss in good faith, why Hawaii\u2019s Framers created the convention process to propose popular democratic reforms adverse to the Legislature\u2019s institutional self-interest.<\/span><\/p> As the No Coalition\u2019s ad campaign against a convention gathers steam in the coming weeks, observers should be asking themselves: is it promoting the right cost comparison? And what exactly is it that Big Labor and Big Business, the key financiers and organizers behind the No Coalition, fear from a convention?\u00a0 Might it be that the costs they most fear, such as a reduction of their control over the State Legislature, might actually benefit the great majority of Hawaii?<\/span><\/p>","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1537","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-blog"],"yoast_head":"\n\n
\n
\n