I want to talk about the New York Constitutional Convention

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > I want to talk about the New York Constitutional Convention

Im Ready for DEATH: Oct 5, 2016

Hello

As the thread title indicated, I would like to talk about the New York Constitutional Convention.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/05/nyregion/constitutional-convention-voting-new-york.html

As I drive around I see a lot of bumper stickers that say "VOTE NO! HIGHER TAXES" . There are other reasons, too. This morning on local talk radio they had the leadership of the Suffolk County AME (Association of Municipal Employees), which is a union. They were very much against having a ConCon (the abbreviated term for the occasion) because they were afraid of their pensions being pilfered by corrupt administrations. I don't blame them. Both political parties from the top to the bottom are corrupt and constantly being indicted.

I'm noticing that there are a lot of people on the left AND right that do not want it. The left do not want to lose their benefits and worker protections. I'm sure they have other concerns but those are the main ones that I have heard. Those on the left are fearful of more taxes, more entitlements, even worse gun control (NY is the pits for gun rights), etc.

So it would seem the main problem is the corruption. People on both sides of the aisle are fearful that monied interests and corrupt politicians will hijack the process and find even more ways to fill their trough with yum-yums. The naive optimist in me wants to believe that we can fix the corruption with the ConCon and put together an executive and legislative system that can get legislation passed that can benefit the people. My personal hit list would be repealing gun control laws that are far too draconian, but I also want some stuff that's considered left of center as well: legalized cannabis, and medicare for all/single payer.

Here is a "NO" list that I found posted by a Long Islander (like me):

New Yorkers already have one the biggest tax burdens in the nation. A Constitutional Convention would only add to that burden by spending millions of dollars unnecessarily. A convention requires expanding government by electing delegates. These delegates have traditionally been political insiders, lobbyists and even sitting elected officials who then collect a second salary. Each delegate gets paid a salary equal to an Assembly Person. Currently that number is $79,500 per year. Delegates get offices, hire staffs and get reimbursed for expenses. The total cost to the taxpayer has been estimated to be up to $300 million dollars. This money can only be made up by tax increases or by cutting programs for New York State citizens.
Long Island has long been the ATM machine the rest of New York State relies on when they need funds. Long Islanders have been burdened with things like the MTA tax, other commuter taxes and some of the highest tolls and fees nationwide. Our neighbors in New York City have frequently charged us for the privilege of living next to them. New York City has most of the voting power in a statewide referendum. Many of these harmful laws which exclusively target Long Islanders would likely be restored by having a Convention. Delegates could also propose new ways for Long Island Tax Payers to subsidize the rest of the state, increasing our taxes and adding new mandates while returning Long Island little.
The NYS Senate has been instrumental in eliminating taxes that punish Long Islanders. One major goal of convention advocates is to eliminate the NYS Senate and have a one house system. This would be devastating for Long Island and would result in New York City having total control.
The Constitution offers many protections but one of the biggest is the guarantee for our children to get a free education. This guarantee could be removed if the constitution were amended. In addition, public libraries, colleges and Universities could be defunded.
Even if you're not a union member, you've probably had to use things like Worker's Comp. Worker's Compensation is a Constitutionally mandated program which provides a safety net when you get injured at your job. It pays your medical bills and compensates you for the time you can't work when injured. Anyone who holds a job should be concerned that this program could be reduced or eliminated by a Constitutional Convention.
[New York State has some of the most beautiful parklands in the Country. The Adirondacks and Catskills offer a place for our children to hike, hunt, fish, and enjoy nature. Many in the industrial world want to strip this land of it's natural resources by drilling, fracking and digging. However, this land is protected by the Forever Wild Clause in the NYS Constitution. The Constitution has kept our parks in place and our drinking water clean. A Constitutional Convention could open our parklands to the devastating effects of mining and drilling.
How often do you see the Right to Life movement and Planned Parenthood agree on an issue? Well, they agree on opposing the Constitutional Convention. A Convention would put all the power into the hands of a very select few. This means that almost any issue which is important to you can be effected in a negative way by a convention.

So far I haven't found any fervent YES!! lists, just half-hearted hopes.

I would like to hear your thoughts and analysis on this. If you are a New Yorker, will you be voting Yes or No come November? And why?

# ? Oct 13, 2017 18:13

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 20, 2024 01:02

Cicero: Dec 17, 2003; Jumpjet, melta, jumpjet. Repeat for ten minutes or until victory is assured.

Im Ready for DEATH posted:

Long Island has long been the ATM machine the rest of New York State relies on when they need funds. Long Islanders have been burdened with things like the MTA tax, other commuter taxes and some of the highest tolls and fees nationwide. Our neighbors in New York City have frequently charged us for the privilege of living next to them. New York City has most of the voting power in a statewide referendum. Many of these harmful laws which exclusively target Long Islanders would likely be restored by having a Convention. Delegates could also propose new ways for Long Island Tax Payers to subsidize the rest of the state, increasing our taxes and adding new mandates while returning Long Island little.

Got any data on those subsidies? Generally it's the biggest urban areas (like NYC) that subsidize the rest of the state.

quote:

The NYS Senate has been instrumental in eliminating taxes that punish Long Islanders. One major goal of convention advocates is to eliminate the NYS Senate and have a one house system. This would be devastating for Long Island and would result in New York City having total control.

Which taxes do you feel punish Long Islanders?

Why would a one house system give NYC total control? Is this one of those times where the right is like, "equal voting power per person isn't fair when we have fewer people!"

quote:

The Constitution offers many protections but one of the biggest is the guarantee for our children to get a free education. This guarantee could be removed if the constitution were amended.

I guess technically a constitutional convention could do all sorts of crazy things, but is this a serious concern? Does either side want to make grade school cost money? This reads like just scaremongering.

# ? Oct 13, 2017 18:27

Best Bi Geek Squid: Mar 25, 2016

op here is my "Yes" list:

1. Enshrine the leading role of the Communist Party of New York in government, economy, and society.

2. Return to the true democratic principles identified in the 1776 constitution of the commonwealth of pennsylvania, including
-a unicameral assembly with annual elections
-a plural executive council with staggered one-year terms
-a prohibition on the legislature enacting a law in the same session in which it is proposed, so that citizens have ample time to consider the probity of the measure
-a group of censors to monitor the conduct of the assembly and council and report on who hosed up

Actual answer: this website seems to have one: http://www.citizensunion.org/state_policy_agenda

# ? Oct 14, 2017 00:29

Im Ready for DEATH: Oct 5, 2016

Cicero posted:

Got any data on those subsidies? Generally it's the biggest urban areas (like NYC) that subsidize the rest of the state.

Which taxes do you feel punish Long Islanders?

Why would a one house system give NYC total control? Is this one of those times where the right is like, "equal voting power per person isn't fair when we have fewer people!"

I guess technically a constitutional convention could do all sorts of crazy things, but is this a serious concern? Does either side want to make grade school cost money? This reads like just scaremongering.

Hi Cicero, that list was not mine, but rather a list that someone else put together as his own concerns. I don't know if any of those concerns have any basis in fact.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 03:30

qkkl: Jul 1, 2013; by FactsAreUseless

As far as I know there's nothing in the US Constitution that prevents an area in a state from seceding from that state and forming their own state. Long Island should secede from New York and form its own state if it feels that it's being taken advantage of by the rest of New York.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 03:49

Communist Zombie: Nov 1, 2011

qkkl posted:

As far as I know there's nothing in the US Constitution that prevents an area in a state from seceding from that state and forming their own state. Long Island should secede from New York and form its own state if it feels that it's being taken advantage of by the rest of New York.

While technically correct, it has to be approved by both the state they're leaving AND Congress.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 07:06

qkkl: Jul 1, 2013; by FactsAreUseless

Communist Zombie posted:

While technically correct, it has to be approved by both the state they're leaving AND Congress.

Yeah, it looks like Long Island has already filed for secession several times in the past and got refused by the New York Legislature. It seems like a big oversight in the US Constitution to not have a way for a less populous area of a state to secede if it wants to.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 09:18

Ogmius815: Aug 25, 2005; centrism is a hell of a drug

qkkl posted:

Yeah, it looks like Long Island has already filed for secession several times in the past and got refused by the New York Legislature. It seems like a big oversight in the US Constitution to not have a way for a less populous area of a state to secede if it wants to.

No actually it's fine.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 16:03

Best Bi Geek Squid: Mar 25, 2016

Ogmius815 posted:

No actually it's fine.

But we loose out on interesting potential states such as:

the duchy of orange county

the appalachian republic of Real America

the northwestern ~~aryan~~ republic

# ? Oct 14, 2017 19:27

Im Ready for DEATH: Oct 5, 2016

Best Bi Geek Squid posted:

op here is my "Yes" list:

1. Enshrine the leading role of the Communist Party of New York in government, economy, and society.

2. Return to the true democratic principles identified in the 1776 constitution of the commonwealth of pennsylvania, including
-a unicameral assembly with annual elections
-a plural executive council with staggered one-year terms
-a prohibition on the legislature enacting a law in the same session in which it is proposed, so that citizens have ample time to consider the probity of the measure
-a group of censors to monitor the conduct of the assembly and council and report on who hosed up

Actual answer: this website seems to have one: http://www.citizensunion.org/state_policy_agenda

Thanks for that link. I guess the biggest fear is the unicameral legislature for the guy I posted above.

Right now, Federally, Republicans own the House by a good margin but only barely own the Senate. So any detractors within the party kills legislation. (which I'm sure the majority of people here are breathing a sigh of relief about).

More conservative New Yorkers fear the opposite happening in NY I suppose, wherein there is no way to hold the line against liberal/progressive legislation. Right now only a tenuous hold in the State Senate by Republicans prevents the Assembly from turning NY into... whatever. Maybe the Communist utopia you are joking about?

# ? Oct 14, 2017 20:02

Best Bi Geek Squid: Mar 25, 2016

yeah having a unicameral legislature would be...interesting. a while back i was all in favor of having one house; i thought that state legislatures tended to be weak when compared to state executives and that unifying the legislative power into a single house would level the playing field. Now, however, i'm really not sure. after watching a few states more closely, there is an astounding amount of crazy poo poo that passes one house only to die or be voted down by the other house. Like really, really stupid poo poo. So maybe bicameralism does help? But maybe those crazy bills only get through one house in the first place because they figure that the other house will kill it anyway so they might as well scratch Representative Crazy-rear end' back. I want to talk with someone who follows Nebraska politics about it.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 20:47

TheBalor: Jun 18, 2001

Best Bi Geek Squid posted:

yeah having a unicameral legislature would be...interesting. a while back i was all in favor of having one house; i thought that state legislatures tended to be weak when compared to state executives and that unifying the legislative power into a single house would level the playing field. Now, however, i'm really not sure. after watching a few states more closely, there is an astounding amount of crazy poo poo that passes one house only to die or be voted down by the other house. Like really, really stupid poo poo. So maybe bicameralism does help? But maybe those crazy bills only get through one house in the first place because they figure that the other house will kill it anyway so they might as well scratch Representative Crazy-rear end' back. I want to talk with someone who follows Nebraska politics about it.

Bicameralism, like literally everything else in government, is a double edged sword. It makes it harder to do anything in government, which veers between being a crippling debility and the only shield against tyranny and ruin.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 21:01

punched my v-card at camp: Sep 4, 2008; Broken and smokin' where the infrared deer plunge in the digital snake

My union is pretty against having one, I'm personally a little more sympathetic to the case for one but will probably still vote no.

The real argument for having one is that it could be a way to finally do away with the culture of albany bullshit. A convention could implement a lot of good government measures like term limits, an expanded popular initiative system, or a statewide public financing system in the mold of new york city's and other campaign finance measures. It could also allow the restoration of home rule in NYC as part of a grand bargain in which the city comprimises on some statewide tax/funding issues and in exchange gets the ability to fully govern itself. Ultimately, at this point it's pretty clear that Albany is incapable of fixing itself, so maybe a wholesale reform of the system could do a lot of good.

On the other hand, there isn't really any reason to believe that it won't just be captured by the same forces that make albany suck so hard. And delegate selection is somewhat based on state senate districts, which have historically given upstate voters disproportionate influence, so the city could get shafted. And enviromental/labor groups have a legit point that the status quo has some great protections and it's risky to put them back on the table.

The other thing to keep in mind is that voters get to approve/deny the final document anyway. So it might be worth approving the convention, trying to get something positive done, and voting no on ratification if it ends up poo poo.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 21:13

Best Bi Geek Squid: Mar 25, 2016

idk if NY already does this but giving authority for drawing state and federal legislative districts to an independent commission would be nice. Maybe do away with districts and have at-large representatives :getin:

Best Bi Geek Squid fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Oct 14, 2017

# ? Oct 14, 2017 21:23

Shimrra Jamaane: Aug 10, 2007; Obscure to all except those well-versed in Yuuzhan Vong lore.

Allowing states to break apart scares me because I could see that opening the flood gates to some red state like Wyoming splitting into 15 different states each with their own 2 senators or some poo poo like that.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 21:41

qkkl: Jul 1, 2013; by FactsAreUseless

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

Allowing states to break apart scares me because I could see that opening the flood gates to some red state like Wyoming splitting into 15 different states each with their own 2 senators or some poo poo like that.

The US Congress can decide whether to admit a new state to the Union or not. Interestingly enough the wiki article doesn't mention if just a majority of Congress is required, or some higher vote percentage. I'm guessing some higher vote percentage is required since otherwise it would have been abused in the past by the ruling party to admit states that would vote in that party's favor.

Long Island could still secede from New York and just be a US territory like Puerto Rico without becoming a state.

# ? Oct 14, 2017 22:07

Best Bi Geek Squid: Mar 25, 2016

providing for the admission of a new state is just an ordinary act of Congress so only a majority is required. party control has definitely influenced when states have been admitted

Edit: depending on the mechanism for statehood could be joint resolution. Either way, majority of each house should be enough

Best Bi Geek Squid fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Oct 14, 2017

# ? Oct 14, 2017 22:30

Cockmaster: Feb 24, 2002

Im Ready for DEATH posted:

[*]Even if you're not a union member, you've probably had to use things like Worker's Comp. Worker's Compensation is a Constitutionally mandated program which provides a safety net when you get injured at your job. It pays your medical bills and compensates you for the time you can't work when injured. Anyone who holds a job should be concerned that this program could be reduced or eliminated by a Constitutional Convention.

Wait, I thought worker's comp was established by federal law - that states could decide the details of how to implement it, but not abolish it on a whim.

# ? Oct 15, 2017 00:11

Sundae: Dec 1, 2005

Cockmaster posted:

Wait, I thought worker's comp was established by federal law - that states could decide the details of how to implement it, but not abolish it on a whim.

The federal law creates worker's comp for federal employees, who are not otherwise covered by state worker comp laws. State worker's compensation laws are entirely at the hands of the state and can be abolished or implemented as they see fit, barring anything already illegal elsewhere.

# ? Oct 15, 2017 07:46

Timeless Appeal: May 28, 2006

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

Allowing states to break apart scares me because I could see that opening the flood gates to some red state like Wyoming splitting into 15 different states each with their own 2 senators or some poo poo like that.

Long Island and its white flight shittery went to Trump by 6%. gently caress them having their own state.

Im Ready for DEATH posted:

[*]Long Island has long been the ATM machine the rest of New York State relies on when they need funds. Long Islanders have been burdened with things like the MTA tax, other commuter taxes and some of the highest tolls and fees nationwide. Our neighbors in New York City have frequently charged us for the privilege of living next to them. New York City has most of the voting power in a statewide referendum. Many of these harmful laws which exclusively target Long Islanders would likely be restored by having a Convention. Delegates could also propose new ways for Long Island Tax Payers to subsidize the rest of the state, increasing our taxes and adding new mandates while returning Long Island little.

I'm anti-Convention, but this is a completely disingenuous argument. Long Island doesn't exist in a vacuum and it does benefit from its proximity from the city. We're not just talking about lawyers and doctors who work in the city but live on the island, but unionized professionals like cops and teachers who are making far higher incomes within the city than they would otherwise while maintaining a suburban experience and living in far cheaper homes. It is fair for Long Islanders to put in to help maintain the city because it benefits Long Island.

Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 13:30 on Oct 15, 2017

# ? Oct 15, 2017 13:27

Im Ready for DEATH: Oct 5, 2016

Article from Newsday:

quote:

By now, you�ve seen the lawn signs. Or the bumper stickers. Or the posts on Facebook.

And you�ve said to yourself: What�s a con-con?

You�re not alone. It�s election season, and you�ve stumbled into what might be the hottest issue on November�s ballot.

Con-con is shorthand for constitutional convention, a gathering of delegates from around New York State who would meet to revise the state constitution. Every 20 years, according to that constitution, New York voters must be asked whether they want to hold one. This is year 20.

What a moment it is. Voters are angry, for lots of reasons. Mostly they�re fed up with: government that no longer seems to work for them; big campaign donors getting favors from elected officials; lawmakers who use their influence to line their pockets; voting laws that protect incumbents; rules that make it difficult to cast a ballot, or to run for office without the backing of a party machine; and, perhaps most frustrating of all, a state government that refuses to address these ills or pass laws supported by most New Yorkers. So voters become cynical and learn to distrust the system. And they drop out. Or, they look to rebel.

And now comes the prospect of a constitutional convention, a vehicle for a constituency ready for change.

At the moment, however, opponents of a convention are flooding the zone with political advertising. Some of their arguments are erroneous. Most are based on fear � the fear of the unknown. No one knows for sure what would happen in a constitutional convention, they say. And they�re right.
They prefer no change to the status quo, and would rather seek the change they want by continuing to work with a State Legislature that has refused to do just that. They are rejecting an opportunity to take the reins away from the corrupt status quo and purge the system of its rot. They�d rather deal with the devil they know, while acknowledging there are a lot of devils in Albany. And they have disingenuously rallied under the misleading banner of �New Yorkers Against Corruption.�
One victim of this heated rhetoric is the truth. There is a lot being said that is simply not fact. To make a good decision on whether to support a constitutional convention, one needs to understand what is myth and what is reality.

MYTH: The people will not be part of the process.
REALITY: The people will be involved every step of the way. Voters will decide next month whether to hold a constitutional convention. If they say yes, they'll vote in November 2018 on which delegates to send. After the convention, which would begin in April 2019, the public will vote one more time on whether to accept or reject whatever changes to the constitution are proposed by the convention.

MYTH: There already is a process to amend the constitution and it works. The State Legislature can propose an amendment by voting for it in two consecutive sessions and submitting it to the public for its vote.
REALITY: It's true that the constitution has been amended more than 200 times since it was rewritten at the 1894 convention. And there are two amendments on the November ballot. One would help communities in the protected Adirondack Park area with needed road-related projects. The second would strip state pensions from public officials with felony corruption convictions. And the legislature was basically shamed into doing that, despite more than two dozen elected state officials being hauled into court on corruption charges in the last decade. Only after the former leaders of the State Senate and Assembly were exposed as self-dealers who deceived the residents of this state did they agree to put the measure on the ballot. Meanwhile, ethics and voting reforms and other issues supported by large majorities of New Yorkers don't come close to seeing the light of legislative day. So yes, there is a process, but most often it doesn't work all that well.

MYTH: A non-vote on November's ballot will be counted as a yes vote.
REALITY: That's preposterous. If you don't vote, you're not counted, as in every other election. This seems to be a scare tactic.

MYTH: Legislators will seek to be the delegates, they'll win election and they'll hijack the process.
REALITY: Legislators can indeed run, but consider this. Delegates to the convention must be paid an Assembly member's salary of $79,500. That means that lawmakers, who also will be running for their legislative seats in 2018, would be trying to collect a second salary while working one job. Double-dipping never sits well with voters. It's hard to imagine many legislators exposing themselves to voters like that. As for controlling the process, why would lawmakers who dance to the tune of special interests that support them do anything those very same interests don't want?

MYTH: Electing delegates by Senate districts that are gerrymandered to keep Republicans in control means the constitutional convention deck will be stacked in their favor.
REALITY: This is absurd. Voters will elect 204 delegates -- three from each of the Senate's 63 districts plus 15 statewide. The GOP holds 31 Senate seats (the party maintains control with help from one Democrat who caucuses with them plus a group of breakaway Democrats). Some Democratic districts are heavily Democratic and could elect three Democratic delegates. Some Republican districts lean only slightly that way and Democrats could pick up one or even two delegates in those districts. Many minor parties across the political spectrum likely will field their own candidates, and true independents can run if they get the required number of signatures on their petitions. Campaigns are likely to be spirited, and mere citizens not bound by major party dictates could run and win. All of which means that in a state in which registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than 2 to 1, GOP control of a constitutional convention is unlikely.

MYTH: Wealthy special interests will dominate as big contributors like the conservative Koch brothers or Long Island's own Steve Bannon benefactors, Robert and Rebekah Mercer, will use their money to get their people elected as delegates and dictate a convention's agenda.
REALITY: This worry is especially precious, given that many high-spending special interest groups, including labor unions, are among those spending to oppose a constitutional convention. And these same special interests already contribute heavily to the legislators who vote on constitutional amendments. The unions say they don't have the financial firepower to stand up to big-money interests, but it's union big money that calls many shots in Albany.

MYTH: A constitutional convention would be a monumental waste of money. Senate Majority Leader John Flanagan puts the figure at $350 million, and other projections range as high as $500 million.
REALITY: This is blatantly false. Estimates for the cost of the last convention, in 1967, range from $7 million to $15 million. SUNY New Paltz political scientist Gerald Benjamin adjusted those figures for inflation to estimate that a convention now would cost $47 million. A reporter mistakenly thought $47 million was the actual cost of the 1967 convention and adjusted it for inflation a second time, which led to the $350 million figure, a mistake for which he since has apologized. But convention opponents like Flanagan, knowingly or unwittingly, seized on the higher figure and are using it wrongly in their arguments. Realistic estimates from experts put the cost of a modern convention at somewhere between $50 million and $100 million.

MYTH: Public pensions, collective bargaining and the "forever wild" clause that protects the Adirondacks could be eliminated by a constitutional convention.
REALITY: That's fearmongering. None of those issues are goals for convention proponents. And each is widely supported by New Yorkers who, remember, have to vote on any potential amendments produced by a convention. The right of public workers to a pension came from the 1938 constitutional convention.

MYTH: A constitutional convention would be an opaque exercise in backroom deal-making, with delegates horse-trading support for proposals and producing an unholy mishmash of amendments.
REALITY: This is an epic example of succumbing to the cynicism that Albany is so good at creating. Assuming that a convention would be the spiritual twin of the capital's three-men-in-a-room style of governance ignores that modern technology should make this the most transparent convention in state history. Every minute could be live-streamed, and probably would be. Social media would guarantee that virtually nothing would be secret. And all votes would be public. You decide: Do you expect the worst of people or the best?

The debate over whether to hold a constitutional convention is in some sense a battle between pessimism and optimism. Do you expect the worst of people or the best? Are you more fearful of the unknown or disgusted by what is known? And, ultimately, do you trust the public that will cast the final judgment?

Those are profound differences.

Either you are consumed by uncertainty and worried about where a convention might go wrong, or you embrace it as a way to make state lawmakers more responsive to citizens and less beholden to special interests, to open up our democracy to more participation by voters and candidates, and once and for all to get rid of corruption.

A constitutional convention could propose a raft of improvements.

Like making it easier for people to cast ballots with early voting, "no-excuse" absentee voting, combined federal and state primary dates, and simpler ballots.

Like making it easier for candidates to get on the ballot, and giving voters real choices by banning cross-endorsements by political parties.

Like producing election districts that more accurately reflect the voters in them by adopting independent redistricting.

Like instituting real ethics reforms such as limits on outside income for legislators, term limits, a full-time legislature, closing the LLC loophole for campaign contributions, and public campaign financing.
Like adding a constitutional right to clean air and water, and protection from discrimination based on gender and sexual orientation.

A constitutional convention is, literally, a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Every 20 years, you the voter gets to decide: If legislators are not doing what you sent them to Albany to do, you can do it yourself. If you give up that chance, two decades is a long time to wait.

Every New Yorker wants a better state government.

The vote in November is the chance to answer the question:
How do we make that happen? Sign up for The Point Go inside New York politics.

# ? Oct 16, 2017 00:08

StupidSexyMothman: Aug 9, 2010

I'm not sure "trust the populace to not vote against their own interests" is the best tactic. It's also a bit disingenuous to act like the big-money donators just fall off the map if the con-con goes through just because they're spending to stop it, as if they aren't going to shift that money into protecting and advancing their interests if the vote passes.

# ? Oct 16, 2017 15:35

Best Bi Geek Squid: Mar 25, 2016

one concern is that bullshit right-wing "taxes = theft + baby murder" and nativist beliefs seem to be on the uptick. might be a kind of dangerous time to open up the constitution and endanger stuff like unions and conservation. idk if NY has a big enough suicide cult for that to be a thing tho

# ? Oct 17, 2017 01:55

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 20, 2024 01:02

ate shit on live tv: Feb 15, 2004; by Azathoth

If you are against the concon you don't believe things can get better and you are doing your best to make sure you are right. gently caress you. Union's are full of FYGM old people who just want to make sure they can retire with their pension and don't give a drat about who comes next. I got news for you, if you refuse to ever attempt to make things better, then things are just going to get worse, you myopic selfish bastards.

# ? Oct 17, 2017 05:07

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > I want to talk about the New York Constitutional Convention