Connecticut Local Politics

Amending the Constitution of the State of Connecticut is not an easy thing to do. For your consideration, the relevant portion of the Constitution on amendments:

Amendments to this constitution may be proposed by any member of the senate or house of representatives. An amendment so proposed, approved upon roll call by a yea vote of at least a majority, but by less than three-fourths, of the total membership of each house, shall be published with the laws which may have been passed at the same session and be continued to the regular session of the general assembly elected at the next general election to be held on the Tuesday after the first Monday of November in an even-numbered year.

An amendment so proposed, approved upon roll call by a yea vote of at least three-fourths of the total membership of each house, or any amendment which, having been continued from the previous general assembly, is again approved upon roll call by a yea vote of at least a majority of the total membership of each house, shall, by the secretary of the state, be transmitted to the town clerk in each town in the state, whose duty it shall be to present the same to the electors thereof for their consideration at the next general election to be held on the Tuesday after the first Monday of November in an even-numbered year.

If it shall appear, in a manner to be provided by law, that a majority of the electors present and voting on such amendment at such election shall have approved such amendment, the same shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as a part of this constitution. Electors voting by absentee ballot under the provisions of the statutes shall be considered to be present and voting.

That boils down to this: Any member can propose an amendment, but there’s a lot it has to go through before you and I can have our final say on it.

There are two ways for an amendment to get on the ballot. If, say, the General Assembly elected in 2006 approves an amendment by a 3/4 vote, it will go to the state’s voters, who can add it to the constitution by a simple majority vote. Also, if the General Assembly elected in 2006 approves it by a majority vote (but not a 3/4 vote) it gets carried over to the regular session of the General Assembly elected in 2008. If they approve it by a majority vote, it goes to voters.

Simple, right?

Well, a lot of amendments get proposed every session, as you can imagine. But very few of them ever see the light of day. This is too bad, since some of the amendments proposed are well worth consideration. Let’s take a look at a few of the proposed amendments for this session:

Teacher Retirement

This amendment would make funding the teacher retirement fund mandatory. A large number of amendments basically saying the same thing were proposed in January–this one seems to be the end result. A public hearing on this amendment is scheduled for March 16th. The important bit:

The teachers’ retirement system shall be funded on an actuarial reserve basis, in accordance with generally accepted actuarial principles. Commencing July 1, 2010, and annually thereafter, the General Assembly shall provide the teachers’ retirement fund with not less than the amount certified as necessary for such funding by the Teachers’ Retirement Board, as reviewed and approved by the General Assembly.

The teachers’ unions want this one. Bad. I really can’t blame them. This one will probably make it to the floor, but I doubt it’ll be passed by 3/4. If it is, we’ll get it in November. If not, the teachers will have to wait at least another two years before this has a chance of being passed by the public.

Direct Initiative

This amendment, proposed by Sen. Debicella, would make it a lot easier for people to make laws or amendments to the constitution by initiative.

An initiative measure may be proposed by presenting to the Secretary of the State a petition that sets forth the text of the proposed law and that is certified to have been signed by a number of electors equal to at least five per cent of those registered to vote in the preceding gubernatorial election. The initiative shall be voted on in the next general election after certifying the petition, and shall be valid if it receives a majority of “yes” votes with not less than sixty per cent of the eligible voters casting ballots.

So far, this amendment hasn’t gone anywhere. I have mixed feelings about whether much in the way of good legislation would come out of this, although the 60% margin is a good threshold. I doubt this will get to the floor.

Four-Year Terms for Legislators

At first, this amendment sounded like a good idea to me. Then I read it:

Starting with the general election held in 2012, members of the general assembly shall be elected to hold office for terms of four years, except that in the general election held in 2012, and in every fifth general election thereafter, members of the general assembly from odd-numbered districts shall be elected to hold office for terms of two years, and in the fourth general election after the general election in 2012, and in every fifth general election thereafter, members of the general assembly from even-numbered districts shall be elected to hold office for terms of two years.

Because that’s not confusing at all. How about this: a four year term, none of this “fifth general election thereafter” nonsense, and some nice term limits? I don’t see much of a future for this one, unless it’s simplified somewhat.

Eminent Domain

Bless you, Sen. Kissel:

Resolved by this Assembly:

That the state constitution be amended to require approval by referendum prior to the taking of private property by eminent domain.

If this amendment came before the voters, it would be approved by a huge margin. It will never get to the voters, sadly.

There are more out there, if you’re interested, but those were the ones I found most interesting.