Constitutional smokescreen
Saving higher education and health care are not the reasons Gov. Jeff Landry wants a new state constitution
Almost every day, Gov. Jeff Landry and his allies in the Legislature seem to reveal a different rationale for a new state Constitution. They want a constitutional convention this summer to “restructure” and “reorganize” it. House Speaker Phillip DeVillier says Landry and the House want to “refresh” it.
Lately, Landry says we need a constitutional convention because the current version is too long.
And now comes another rationale for holding a convention: They want to save higher education and health care from deep cuts.
In a slick new video, DeVillier says Louisiana needs a new Constitution because he and Landry worry about what might happen to funding for LSU and other colleges and universities. They’re also concerned that health care is overexposed to cuts.
To some extent, they’re correct. The state budget contains too many statutory and constitutional protections for many departments and programs. Health care and higher education do not enjoy the same protections as other less important state spending.
But those expressions of concern about higher education and health care do not square with the fact that Landry and other Republicans have never shown much commitment to those parts of the budget. In fact, since Gov. Bobby Jindal's days, higher education and health care have been Louisiana GOP leaders’ main targets.
While it’s true that those two areas suffer from disproportionate reductions in lean budget years, it’s also true that nothing has ever prevented Republican lawmakers from finding new revenue for them.
This historical neglect is one reason why no one should take DeVillier or Landry at their word that they want to rewrite the Constitution because they’re concerned about the potential for disproportionate cuts.
But because they want us to think that they’ve given this constitutional deficiency considerable thought, shouldn’t we expect Landry or someone in his orbit to explain how they would solve this problem? Shouldn’t they tell us which parts of the budget they propose to protect from cuts and those they’d leave exposed?
Does anyone believe they don’t already know? And, if they do have that part of the constitution already drafted — one that protects higher education and health care — why wouldn’t they want us to see it now? If what they have in mind is so sensible, why wouldn’t they be touting it?
What Landry, DeVillier, and others have in mind is clearly problematic or they’d be showing it to us. But to do so now risks losing the votes they need to call the convention. So it is better to hide their real intentions and spring them on delegates after the convention is authorized.
That’s what I’d do if I had a proposal that might cost me votes in the House or Senate. I’d keep things as murky as possible. Instead of specifics, I’d talk about broad principles like the need to “renew,” “refresh,” or “reorganize.”
And speaking of organization and length, those are red herrings. Trust me on this: Jeff Landry is not some constitutional Marie Kondo.
Before computers, it might have been difficult to find a specific provision in a document that long. But now, with word search and other functions, combing through the Constitution is not that challenging.
Bureaucrats who are intimately familiar with portions of the Constitution that apply to their departments consult and rely upon it the most. Some lawyers, too, rely on the Constitution. These are people skilled in legal research and accustomed to dealing with lengthy sections of statute and case law.
Trust me also on this: If Landry and his pals manage to trim the Constitution down to 20,000 words, you are still never going to read it.
If his problem is the complexity of the Constitution, Landry could easily ask the Attorney General’s office to assemble a committee of lawyers and others to develop an annotated, easy-to-read version that any layperson could understand.
Complexity and length might be complications and annoyances, but they’re not good reasons to convene a constitutional convention that is likely motivated by something Landry and his allies are unwilling to disclose.
All the reasons they’ve touted so far seem like smokescreens to obscure what they are really up to.
I’m not sure what that is, but I’m confident it involves giving Landry more power and the rest of us less say in what happens in our government.
The good news is that the public isn’t buying what Landry is selling
The Baton Rouge Advocate reported Sunday on the results of a statewide poll it commissioned: “Only 1% of voters said getting a new constitution ought to be one of the governor’s top goals, the poll showed. Seven other issues were ranked more important by voters.”
Another statewide poll of 800 likely voters, this one commissioned by a group called Louisiana Voters for Constitutional Integrity, probed the idea of a constitutional rewrite more deeply.
Among its key findings:
Voters are open to the idea of rewriting the constitution – if it is done the right way. Nearly nine-in-ten voters (88%) agree that rewriting the constitution might be a good idea, but only if it’s done in the right way. Voters also agree that the right way gives more say to the voters than the proposed convention, and should allow voters to choose the delegates for the convention (82%).
Voters are skeptical that the current convention is being done the right way. Voters have concerns about the convention process, that it is happening too quickly and needs to be slowed down (73% agree), that it gives too much power to special interests and big corporations (81%), and that the politicians pushing the proposal are not handling it in the right way (69%). These concerns carry across party lines.
Ultimately, voters agree that rewriting the constitution will hurt regular Louisianians. Nearly two-thirds of voters (62%) agree that rewriting the constitution will result in changes that hurt regular Louisianians including majorities of Black and White voters, as well as Democrats and Independents and No-Party voters.
Don't stop revealing the truth. I'll keep sharing it.
I would add that any understanding or concerns about Louisiana holding a Constitutional Convention ‘refresh’ doesn’t even make their list of concerns.