|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 04:25 |
|