Michigan’s ballot has a lot of options this November. You can choose between Republicans and Democrats, men and women, and candidates from all across the state. You will also have at least one, if not two, statewide proposals on the ballot.
Thanks to the voters of 1960, and the New Michigan Constitution of 1963, every 16 years we have the opportunity to determine whether we will elect our fellow Michiganders to re-write our state constitution – or the holding of a Constitutional Convention (aka con-con). The voters of 1960 tossed out our 1908 Constitution, which had been amended 70 times to keep up with the times, which replaced our earlier 1850 and 1835 versions. The question has been on the ballot three times since we ratified the current state Constitution, and has failed every single time.
I feel a little like the boy who cried wolf, but I am worried this year might be different.
One data point that leads me to believe we could be in for a con-con is the sheer anger in much of the electorate. Abdul El-Sayed and I might not be on the same page on a lot of issues, but I do agree with him on why voters put Donald Trump in the White House: Americans, and Michiganders, are tired and angry about the current state of the political system and were — and are — looking for a change.
El-Sayed himself is a sign that Michiganders are looking for a different way of governing — as was the Michigan Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission — and for the first time in the Trump era they will have the opportunity to make their feelings known on a broader scale.
What does a con-con look like? We can make lots of assumptions based on the 1961-62 Convention, which took 10 months and significantly changed our system of government, and was then approved by voters in April of 1963. That con-con was the first time women and non-White men were part of the process, and included new provisions that incorporated the Civil Rights issues that dominated the political conversation of the era.
If the con-con question passes, 148 of our fellow Michiganders will be elected in a partisan election to represent their state House and Senate districts. In other words, get ready for more political ads. And those willing to run will likely be very partisan and will have their own ideas about how to run government and what should — and shouldn’t be — included in the state constitution.
And that’s the part that worries me.
Michiganders have plenty of reasons to be frustrated with our political system. We can be angry with Lansing. We can be tired of the two parties. We can believe our government isn’t working as well as it should. But a Constitutional Convention isn’t a protest vote. It is handing 148 people, elected in partisan races, the opportunity to rewrite the document that governs nearly every part of state government.
Maybe they would make it better. Maybe they would make it worse. But once that door is open, everything is on the table.
The irony is that voters who are angry with politicians could end up responding by electing 148 more of them — and giving them the biggest political assignment Michigan has handed anyone in more than 60 years.
So when you get to the bottom of your ballot this November, don’t treat the con-con question like the judges you forgot to research or the millage you first heard about when you walked into the voting booth.
Know what you’re voting for.
Because anger can change an election. This year, it could change Michigan’s Constitution — truly the Wrath of the Con-Con.
Andrea Bitely is the founder and principal of Bitely Communications, a Lansing-based public affairs firm specializing in political, corporate and crisis communications.
This article originally appeared on The Holland Sentinel: The wrath of con-con: Michigan should keep its constitution | Opinion
Reporting by Andrea Bitely, The Holland Sentinel / The Holland Sentinel
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
By Andrea Bitely, The Holland Sentinel | USA TODAY Network
