Where I Stand -- Mike O'Callaghan: Con Con is a con job

LET NEVADA'S SENIOR newspaperman and political expert Jack McCloskey take a whack at Question No. 17 on our ballot. Jack, a lifelong Republican, has watched the Nevada scene for more than eight decades and his wisdom has increased yearly. Long ago he learned that if a voter has any doubt about a question he or she should vote NO. When discussing this year's Q17 he goes even further when writing:

"NO -- This is probably the most mixed-up, ridiculous and dangerous proposal we have ever seen on a Nevada ballot. It is an advisory question only, but if approved could make Nevada the laughingstock of the nation. It is called a term limit proposal but goes far beyond that. First, it proposes to limit the terms of U.S. senators and representatives, to wit:

" 'Members of Nevada's congressional delegation are instructed to pass the congressional term limit amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Nevada State Legislature is also instructed to make application to the U.S. Congress to call a Constitutional Convention for proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution. All candidates for the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Nevada State Legislature would be judged on mandated criteria to determine if each worked fully to ensure enactment of the Congressional term limits amendment. The Nevada Secretary of State would inform voters of a candidate's failure to act accordingly by placing an informational statement next to that candidate's name on the ballot.' "

McCloskey goes on to write, "That's just one small part of Question 17 but it should be enough to convince any voter that the person or persons who prepared the initiative petition must have no problems obtaining cannabis, or something stronger, for medicinal purposes, or otherwise. No matter how strongly you might favor term limits, don't be drenched by the wild waters of Question 17 on the November general election ballot."

In addition to being more than a little goofy the writers of Q17 are again trying to sneak in the call for a Constitutional Convention. The dangers of such a gathering evidently have long been lost on the electorate and if Q17 is passed it will reflect negatively more on our memories than our intelligence. So it's time to again discuss this matter.

Only 11 years ago our country was just two states away from having the Second Constitutional Convention. That's when some folks thought it would be wise to hold a convention to pass a balanced-budget amendment. A quick course in what could happen if a second convention was called soon had several state legislatures backpedaling on their demand.

In 1979, the Nevada Legislature threw the Silver State's support behind holding a Con Con. Then in 1987, after a crash course in constitutional reality, a new Legislature produced AJR25 to withdraw Nevada's support. Assemblyman Bob Price, D-North Las Vegas, was the author of this resolution.

James Madison long ago warned us when he said " ... having witnessed the difficulties and dangers experienced by the first convention, which assembled under very propitious circumstance, I would tremble for the result of a second."

Madison and every constitutional scholar for more than 200 years have realized that the action of a Con Con can't be limited to any single subject. As former Chief Justice Warren Burger warned, "There's no way to put a muzzle on a Constitutional Convention."

Some folks, those on both extremes of the political spectrum, would love to have a convention. This would provide the majority of those attending an opportunity to change our complete system of government. That's right, folks. No matter what guise is used to call the convention, the moment it is convened everything, including the U.S. Constitution, is on the table to be changed or bartered away by special interests. What an easy way to destroy the world's greatest and most democratic nation!

Term limits is one issue but a Con Con is an entirely different animal. It's an animal that can be used to eat up all of the values we treasure as Americans. And as McCloskey says, it's one more step toward making Silver State voters the "laughingstock of the nation."

archive