No Need for PA Convention to Downsize Legislature

Making the rounds of Pennsylvania discussion forums again, a Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention, for something, anything...

We've covered the dangers of such extensively - see our sidebar info... on PA Constitutional Convention

Selected links

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/search?q=PA+Constitutional+Convention

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/04/russ-diamond-pa-convention-game.html

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/06/pa-con-con-limited-scope-may-not-be.html

Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Response pacleansweep: A reflection upon a Pa. convention

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/06/response-pacleansweep-reflection-upon.html

Update

PA state reps Galloway and King want a referendum for a PA Constitutional Convention - the referendum would be submitted, according to reports posted, this November 2008. Gee isn't that kind of rushed? Also isn't the most important election in our nation's history about to take place this November 2008? Why a rush to push a selection of delegates and authorize convening a convention - whenever - at this point in time? What on earth is the rush? How about we see if H. William DeWeese gets kicked out, and other oath-breakers?

http://blogs.phillyburbs.com/news/bcct/galloway-king-want-constitutional-convention/

Reps. Galloway, King: Time to review the state's constitution

Lawmakers call for citizens' constitutional convention

http://www.pahouse.com/PR/140071408.asp

Update Galloway video everybody else has these conventions, why can't we... have a study? A study is different than actually convening a convention...

http://www.pahouse.com/Galloway/AV.asp?page=1&Vidpage=1&VidClip=101507_Galloway&VidmediaID=9143

Update links to hearings held on call for convention

http://rauterkus.blogspot.com/2007/02/running-mate-on-hearing-about-possible.html?showComment=1173066600000

Update

Monday, July 14, 2008 - 1:58 PM EDT
Pa. lawmakers call for constitutional convention

Two Democratic legislators from Bucks County announced efforts on Monday to get a referendum placed on November's ballot, calling for a citizens' constitutional convention.

Pennsylvania's constitution last received a limited review in 1967 and hasn't been significantly updated since 1857, said state Rep. John Galloway, who along with state Rep. Chris King, introduced legislation to get the referendum placed on the Nov. 4 ballot.

http://philadelphia.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2008/07/14/daily9.html

Update Times Tribune legislators should sign on to PA Con-Con cause they are so ethically-challenged and bonusgate happened...

Corruption needs response Hold session on integrity, constitutional convention
Published: Friday, July 18, 2008

http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/articles/2008/07/18/editorial/sc_times_trib.20080718.a.pg14.tt18edit1_s1.1817593_edi.txt

Update Donald Hoffman OK with a PA Constitutional convention for...

Another View

Pennsylvania needs a coalition of reformers
Donald Hoffman
July 15, 2008

http://www.mcall.com/news/opinion/all-left_col-a.6503398jul15,0,3396455.column

Update Mark wants one for...

Friday, July 18, 2008
Democracy Rising Reports about the PA Folly
Posted by Mark Rauterkus

http://rauterkus.blogspot.com/2008/07/democracy-rising-reports-about-pa-folly.html

Tim Potts Democracy Rising PA for...

Tuesday, Jul. 15, 2008
Pennsylvania can and must do much better

http://www.centredaily.com/331/story/715619.html

Grassroots PA Say it isn't so?? OK only Diamond (and Conservative Goddess) hot on support. Everybody else is looking behind the public image mirror... especially regarding Chris King.

Capitolman | 2008-07-15 18:21:57 | +1

King thinks that this will take some of the heat off of him for accepting a $5,000 bonus while he took part of the year off to campaign in 2006. Folks aren’t that stupid, Chris!!

http://grassrootspa.com/?p=4130

Russ Diamond continues to stomp for a Pennsylvania citizen's constitutional convention. There, in the grassroots PA Forum

http://grassrootspa.com/?p=4130

And For... well, whatever comes up, like bonusgate outrage

what're the next steps for PA Clean Sweep asks a PA Clean sweep poster to the topic Bonusgate Pics

Diamond responds in the large letters

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/20429

and for what purpose, why... incumbents just don't face party challengers in the Primary, oh no... call a Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention... just can't get enough people to elect me for representative of 101st District, instead of... an incumbent

Slim and none

http://www.russdiamond.org/oped030908.html

See below for more Diamond spin.

Problem as we see it - a PA Constitutional Convention cannot be made to stay "limited" by an enabling act, once the delegates convene... delegates don't like gun rights... bye bye. A new Constitution could be crafted, in fact, and then submitted to the people who might, yes, might say OK. Courts would have no recourse to overturn because the "people" ok'd the deal...

We'll keep tracking, especially with talk of a potential this November for a referendum question to call a convention in 2009. And, those delegates, why they'd be chosen this November.

Again, seem kind of rushed to you?

If the people wake up to their true power which is in their hands every couple of years, it's called the ballot box, the legislators won't need to call a special session for integrity, or anything else. They'll fear they won't be sent back to Harrisburg if they don;t shape up.

The Constitution of PA is not broken, nor does it need tampered with and fixed to get "good government."

Good government comes with good people. Elect only those who adhere to the PA Constitution (and U.S. Constitution) - and dismiss all others who don't.

Net the Truth Online

Original post included

PA Clean Sweep

Convention
There are currently two bills aimed at enabling a constitutional convention in Pennsylvania, HB649 and SB291. Both bills follow the 1967 convention model, which is unacceptable in today’s atmosphere.

Despite the deficiencies in both bills, we awarded 3 points to all co-sponsors (X) to reward their acknowledgement that a major restructing effort is required to steer the Commonwealth back on the right track. Others (Z) have publicly indicated definitive support for a constitutional convention. If a better bill is introduced, we'll adjust this category accordingly.

http://www.pacleansweep.com/cgi-bin/reportcard.cgi?sort_on=8

See Diamond's posting at Penn Live Capitol Forum

7177.1. You Don't Need
by RussDiamond, 5/28/08 20:19 ET

http://www.pennlive.com/forums/capitol/index.ssf

Apparently, state Sen. James Ferlo wants a convention to reign in the ethically-challenged state legislators so appropriate in the midst of the recent announcement of indictments related to bonus-gate...

Watch if they don't try to sell us a convention to make them stop such illegal activities...

Our sidebar links include material that shows the dangers of calling a convention, even one that might be considered limited via an enabling act.

Our state legislators just don't get it. Neither do many others. It's not the PA Constitution's fault the state elite took payraises during the same year they authorized a salary increase - all done to skirt the existing law as outlined in the PA Constitution. It's the legislators.

We don't need a convention to downsize the state legislature, rachet back the salaries of legislative staff, or have our legislators eliminate their own unconstitutional perks, etc.

We need legislators who read the PA Constitution, understand its intent, and then follow it.

Net the Truth Online

Corbett mounts war against 'culture of corruption'
By Brad Bumsted
STATE CAPITOL REPORTER
Sunday, July 13, 2008

"Too much power rests with individuals based on seniority," said Sen. Jim Ferlo, D-Highland Park. He has sponsored a bill that would authorize a limited constitutional convention to curtail things such as leaders' power, salaries and the size of legislative staffs.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_577402.html

Penn Live Forum 7395. PA Constitutional Convention?
by onceaDZ, 7/14/08 12:35 ET
How do we the voters go about getting our Pennsylvania constitution reformed? I should know this from high school Civics classes, but that was a while ago. We need to amend the Pennsylvania constitution to 1) make our legislature part-time again (no more career state legislators) 2) reduce the number of legislators, and 3) impose term limits. Why should anyone be permitted to serve longer than the Chief Executive? A maximum 8-year term, and scuttle the salary&benefits-for-life after one has served. I so agree with Reeves' column in today's Patriot-News. How do we make that happen?

7396. Maybe we need
by jenmil, 7/14/08 13:01 ET
a march on the steps for a Constitutional Convention. Just like we did against the payraise.

http://www.pennlive.com/forums/capitol/?initial=true

7177.1. You Don't Need
by RussDiamond, 5/28/08 20:19 ET
Re: Kingdom for attorney by IMmattfoley, 5/28/08
a legal background to explain it.

The statutory and/or constitutional changes required to make this happen are a simple matter of accumulating the sufficient votes necessary in the legislature.

But because lawyers stand to lose big in a "loser pays" system, because they pretty much own the executive branch, the judicial branch, and have many of their members peppered amongst the General Assembly, the chances of attaining sufficient numbers to make it happen are quite diminished.

Pennsylvania allowed the lawyers to fully take over government in the 1960s, to include re-writing nearly the entire Constitution to their liking, and now we're feeling the brunt of it 40 years later.

Just one more reason why we need a citizens' constitutional convention a la SB1290.

I'm not bashing lawyers here - there are some good ones - but this is the reality of PA.

http://www.pennlive.com/forums/capitol/index.ssf

Folmer pushes for "citizens' convention"

HARRISBURG — Lebanon County Sen. Mike Folmer has started a new push
for the state's first constitutional convention in four decades.
Folmer sponsored a bill that would allow 150 ordinary citizens to
decide on changes to the state's fundamental laws. It's the latest
call for a constitutional convention since the aborted legislative
pay raise of 2005 focused newfound attention on how the state works.

By RICHARD FELLINGER
Lebanon Daily News
March 3, 2008

Yet convening one appears to be a long shot.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/19835

Legislature needs to be downsized

...The size of our lawmakers' staffs is out of whack and getting wackier.

The question is: Do we need such a large, full-time Legislature? How do other states govern with fewer lawmakers working far less time on their legislative duties?

http://www.pennlive.com/columns/patriotnews/reeves/index.ssf?/base/columnists/1215997807214030.xml&coll=1&thispage=2

Outlining the pros of a new 'con con'
Sunday, February 25, 2007

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07056/764591-155.stm

PA Constitution

http://members.aol.com/StatutesPA/Index.html

Just found

Planning official wants to make municipal consolidation easier

Elwin Green, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Wednesday, December 14, 2005

The new chairman of the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission called for a state constitutional convention yesterday to rewrite Pennsylvania law so that local governments can more easily consolidate...The report, compiled by PolicyLink, a California think tank, advocates regional development that "reduces economic and social disparities" by such initiatives as reverse-commute programs that provide transportation between suburban employers and inner-city neighborhoods, and land banks that recycle vacant and abandoned properties.


http://www.sustainablepittsburgh.org/NewFrontPage/Sustainable_Pittsburgh_Articles.html

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05348/621809.stm

Saturday, February 24, 2007
State Senate discusses constitutional convention
Friday, February 23, 2007
By Ann Belser, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Voters in Pennsylvania could have a new state constitution to ratify as soon as the next presidential election.

But there's a lot to do if that's going to happen.

The state Senate Government Committee, headed by Sen. Jeffrey E. Piccola, R-Dauphin, held its first in a series of hearings yesterday on convening a constitutional convention for the first time in 40 years.

Sen. Jim Ferlo, D-Highland Park, was the first speaker on the proposal at the hearing held at Duquesne University Law School. Mr. Ferlo had proposed a bill calling for a constitutional convention during the last legislative session and has introduced his bill again.

Mr. Ferlo said a constitutional convention could address legislative salaries, the size of the Legislature, "procedural issues such as lame duck sessions and the process for the introduction, amending and adoption of bills."

http://cpartyalleghenycounty.blogspot.com/2007/02/state-senate-discusses-constitutional.html

This post was updated Friday July 18, 2008

Russ Diamond PA Convention Game

Russ Diamond, known for founding PA Clean Sweep back in 2005 to mount opponents to incumbents in the Pennsylvania state legislature who voted themselves salary increases and took them in the form of unvouchered expenses, and who also mounted a campaign for Governor of PA which failed, is reshaping his argument for a Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention.

Diamond's opinion-piece is posted on a Centrist at Heart which touts itself as a moderate conservative site and also published in a Herald-Standard commentary entitled: "Latecomer Rendell tries to hijack reform train."

In it, Diamond slams PA Governor Ed Rendell's consideration of adoption of a series of government reforms and equates Rendell's proposals to an attempt to hijack the "reform train."

There's no doubt Russ Diamond attempts trickery to reel in "the people" to his cause of holding a so-called citizens' convention.

Diamond again first tries to convince readers that there is a broad and massive PA reform movement darn it, there really, really is.

If you keep saying something over and over again it must be true.

Don't be fooled. There is no widespread, outraged public screaming for a PA Constitutional Convention to be held to enact reform measures the state's legislators could propose themselves and the Governor could sign.

There isn't a mass of people storming Harrisburg to demand a PA Convention be held to alter the structure and the foundation of our PA republican form of government.

Admittedly, Governor Ed Rendell has adopted the language of candidates who ran on issues of reform, but contrary to Diamond's presentation, there is no massive reform train - desirous of overhauling our PA Constitution - to hijack.

The ending of his opinion piece shows Diamond's willingness to try again to fool the people of Pennsylvania all the time on the issue of a PA Constitutional Convention.

Diamond wraps up his opinion-piece with:

if he truly believes in the right of self-governance as enumerated by Article I of the Constitution, a carefully crafted citizens' convention provides no cause for hand wringing, anguish or hesitation of spirit.

See how Diamond spins?

If you believe in the right of self-governance... there's no cause for hand-wringing with a carefully crafted citizens' convention.

I guess if one lists a really long list of the dangers of both a limited and unlimited convention, as we've done here at Net the Truth Online (and Vote Fix) ever since the issue of a convention arose in August 2005 during Diamond's speech at a PA Newspaper Association meeting, then one must not believe in the right of self-governance, according to Diamond.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007 PA Constitution Did No Wrong

Wednesday, February 21, 2007 PA Constitutional Convention: Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid

Saturday, January 27, 2007 PA Reform Populists Want Convention Initiatives Referendums

(See sidebar and archives search for more)

Don't let Diamond fool you. Those of us who have an objection to a PA Constitutional Cconvention believe in self-governance, and as well, maintaining the foundation of our nation and our state as a republic, representative government over direct democracy.

The Founders warned of democracy. Those who want an unlimited or open general convention also want initiatives and referendums which is direct democracy.

• Update: April 27, 2007 However, Diamond has responded he isn't among those who desire an open or unlimited general convention, rather, he proposes a general convention, excluding Article I. Diamond further relays he doesn't want an unlimited constitutional convention.

Lastly, it wasn't Rendell's idea to form an Office of Public Records Advocate. That's the proposal of newly elected freshman, Timothy Mahoney, whose idea Rendell obviously now supports as does re-elected Democrat H. William DeWeese.

And, the idea is an example of what can be proposed, supported, accepted, and adopted in legislation without the need for a PA Constitutional Convention.

Let the public get behind the effort for open records legislation, and all other reform measures. Educate them to become informed on the issues, and then make their opinions well-known to their representatives.

In addition, the state legislature recently adopted 31 of 32 reform measures, which again, shows there is no need to mount a convention to get the PA legislators to reform themselves.

Governor Rendell makes a well-stated case against a convention by the very action of his proposing the type of reforms he's proposed. He got the message from the defeats of a handful of the state's top leadership in the '06 Primary and General elections.

We can discuss whether his proposals have merit, but we don't need a PA Convention to propose amendments to the Constitution. The PA Constitution did no wrong.

It doesn't take a convention to get the state legislators and Governor to clean up their own acts. It takes the threat of people becoming engaged in their own action - at the polling place - the last election, the next election, and the next.

Latecomer Rendell tries to hijack reform train
By Russ Diamond
04/07/2007
Gov. Ed Rendell should step aside from his bid to become the state's reformer-in-chief. While some of his ideas may have merit, the governor has no more right than the average citizen to prescribe the structure of state government in Pennsylvania and his viewpoint is distorted by his position.


Perhaps his goal of a better open records policy is desirable, but his suggestion of creating an Office of Public Records Advocate might be just another plump patronage position to be filled by political pals. Maybe the people can come up with a better plan for making government more transparent.

Perhaps merit selection for state appellate judges is an idea worth considering, but what if the people would rather make all judicial races non-partisan affairs and ban contributions to those races by lawyers?

How could Rendell's proposed Appellate Court Nominating Commission, dominated by a majority of legislative and executive appointees and confirmed by the Senate, improve the independence of the judiciary?

Independence from the other two branches should be encouraged, but independence from the sovereign people at the voting booth should not.

Perhaps the governor's suggested campaign finance limits appear to level the electoral playing field. On the other hand, maybe the people of this Commonwealth realize that the voter revolt of 2006 would not have been possible under those limitations and that no financial ceiling could ever negate the current incumbency protection program.

Perhaps Rendell's legislative term limits sound like a good idea, but reality in Pennsylvania suggests that if the General Assembly was truly part-time and was stripped of the unconstitutional perks it now enjoys, term limits would be utterly unnecessary.

Perhaps Pennsylvanians want a smaller legislature, but maybe they'd like a larger one, or to keep its size the same, with some of the above mentioned features and fewer expenses. Maybe they want to look at the other 49 states to see what others are doing before deciding which path is best for the Commonwealth.

Perhaps the time has come for citizen redistricting, but Rendell's 11-member commission would include four legislators and three appointees of the governor, two of whom would be legislators.

The remaining four would be appointed by - you guessed it - the four legislative caucus leaders. Pennsylvanians just might have a slightly different notion of how a citizens redistricting commission should look.

On constitutional issues in Pennsylvania, the governor's opinion has no more real or deserved weight than the average citizen's.

Perhaps the governor has some good ideas. Perhaps he doesn't. Either way, today's climate dictates that constitutional change should not be viewed only through the myopic lens of the chief executive.

The merit of Rendell's ideas should be discussed openly among citizens, not quietly between the three branches of government. Other citizens should be able to discuss their ideas as well.

The proper forum for such a discussion is a constitutional convention. Surely, the governor would be free to provide his vision for consideration at such a gathering.

"Citizens will not rest until there is an end to perks, an end to control by private interests and an end to political rules that shut them out of the process," the governor said in a press release.

But his plan eliminates no perks, suppresses the freedom of speech in political races and utterly shuts the people out of the process of structural change.

Nearly two years after the reform train left the station as Ed Rendell signed the pay raise, the governor is using his bully pulpit to try to hijack it.

Perhaps he doesn't realize that many other citizens were on board well ahead of him. Their voices on constitutional matters deserve an equally fair hearing.

In announcing his preferred reforms, Rendell expressed trepidation at the prospect of a constitutional convention, but if he truly believes in the right of self-governance as enumerated by Article I of the Constitution, a carefully crafted citizens' convention provides no cause for hand wringing, anguish or hesitation of spirit.

A plan for such a convention of the people is available at www.PACleanSweep.com.

Russ Diamond of Annville is chair of PACleanSweep.com

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18179797&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Also

Monday, April 02, 2007
Russ Diamond: Rendell Hijacking the Reform Train

http://centristatheart.blogspot.com/2007/04/russ-diamond-rendell-hijacking-reform.html

More

Rendell proposes major government reforms
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
By Tracie Mauriello, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau

HARRISBURG -- Gov. Ed Rendell had no qualms about accepting $100,000-and-up campaign contributions when he ran for re-election last fall.

Now, though, he says that's too much; contributions should be limited to $5,000 in gubernatorial elections and $2,000 in most other races.

"There's far too much influence in the governmental process by people and organizations with large amounts of money," Mr. Rendell told reporters yesterday at the Pennsylvania Press Club's monthly luncheon.

Campaign finance limits are one part of a package of reforms the governor is putting forth.

He also wants to expand open records laws, change the judicial selection process, reduce the size of the Legislature and impose term limits on senators and representatives, all by 2012.

Meanwhile, Sen. Jeffrey Piccola, R-Dauphin, held a hearing yesterday on whether to hold a constitutional convention later this year or in 2008 to address term limits and the size of the Legislature. He expects it would last three months and involve 150 delegates elected from around the state.

Several citizens groups who fought against the 2005 pay raise urged such a convention but differ over whether the agenda should be limited to just a few issues or whether any aspect of state government should be up for discussion.

Matthew Brouillette of the Commonwealth Foundation urged a limited agenda, saying he didn't want the process to get bogged down in controversial social issues such as gun control and violence.

Meanwhile, Tim Potts of Democracy Rising and Russ Diamond of Clean Sweep advocated an open agenda.

Mr. Rendell prefers to amend the constitution without a convention. Changes would have to be approved by two separate sessions of the Legislature and by voters during a statewide referendum.

"I see dangers in calling a constitutional convention," he said. "I don't think we can limit the scope of such a convention" and talks could drag on for months without action.

Judicial selection is a key part of Mr. Rendell's reform package. He wants them to be selected through a merit system, instead of a political one, where campaigns often are financed by lawyers or businesses that are involved in a lot of lawsuits.

Under his proposal, a 14-member committee would nominate between two to five candidates. The governor would select one for Senate approval. If the Senate rejects three candidates brought forth by the governor, the nominating panel would have final authority on an appointment.

Meanwhile, Mr. Rendell is calling for a separate committee to redistrict the state into fewer legislative districts...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07086/772842-85.stm

Related

Highlights of the Citizens' Constitutional Convention Act of 2007 as proposed by Russ Diamond, PACleanSweep Chair

Convention to be "general" except for Article I

http://www.pacleansweep.com/ccc07.html

TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SENATE STATE GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE

REGARDING A CITIZENS’ CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
Presented by Russ Diamond Chair, PACleanSweep
March 26, 2007

http://www.pacleansweep.com/rhd032607.html

The Reformers
By Brad Bumsted
STATE CAPITOL REPORTER
Sunday, March 25, 2007

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/bumsted/s_499440.html

A Call For A Constitutional Convention In PA
Posted by Chris on Tuesday, April 3, 2007 at 9:32 am and filed under GrassrootsPA.

Russ Diamond
Posted Tuesday, April 3, 2007 at 5:35 pm | Permalink not yet rated + -
Greg-

As an instructional aid, the 1873 convention excluded Article I. The delegates messed with it anyway and the voters approved their tamperings. This could be avoided by including fidelity to the enabling act in the delgates oath of office. I’ve done that at http://www.pacleansweep.com/ccc07.html

This would subject the convention to court challenge *if* the delegates stray from the mandate. Wasn’t thought of in 1873...

http://www.grassrootspa.com/blog/archives/13743

Written on March 26th, 2007 in News Of The Day, PA Politics, PA Government, PA Constitutional Convention, PA Constitution
by Tim Potts_DR News

A co-founder of Democracy Rising PA today asked the Senate State Government Committee to authorize the Commonwealth’s first general constitutional convention in more than 130 years and to adopt a method for selecting delegates “to achieve the goal of fair representation for all … segments of the citizenry.”

Tim Potts said Democracy Rising PA since 2005 has collected ideas for changes to the state’s Constitution. Now numbering more than 180, the ideas touch every Article of the Constitution.

Democracy Rising PA is the only group so far calling for a general convention. Others have proposed to limit the areas of the Constitution that delegates could address.

Potts said Democracy Rising PA believes it would be unconstitutional and contrary to the principles of self-governance to hold a limited convention.

To limit the convention, he said, would be “tantamount to King George telling Thomas Jefferson what he could discuss in the Declaration of Independence and to deny that those convened in Philadelphia in 1787 could go beyond the confederation to propose to their fellow citizens a more perfect union. It bespeaks a distrust of citizens that undermines the foundation of this noble experiment.”

Potts said a limited convention could forbid discussion of dozens of ideas, including...

http://papundits.com/index.php/category/around-pa/constitutional-convention/

PA: Beware Sen. Piccola Proposal Special Session Will Lead to Convention

The Pennsylvania state legislators are under scrutiny in the wake of "bonusgate." Criminal charges have been brought by Attorney General, Tom Corbett, who by the way is about to make a bid for the governorship of PA.

His investigation is ongoing, and we'll be closely watching that.

A recent poll noted in the Tribune Review shows some 76 percent want the Governor to call a special session on "legislative reform."

76 percent believe Gov. Ed Rendell should call a special session this summer on legislative reform.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_581226.html

But note, is the poll inclusive of a question about a call for a Constitutional Convention, one which will open up the historical and binding document to potential alteration in unexpected ways?

Criminal charges related to the state attorney general office's probe of legislative bonuses have stoked the fires for convening a constitutional convention to clean up the mess in Harrisburg.

http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/224873

The legislators took an early recess which is to extend into September.

Senator Piccola (also see below)

Posted on Thu, Jul. 17, 2008
Pa. lawmakers seek special session on ethics reform
By Christopher Wink and Mario F. Cattabiani
Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau

HARRISBURG - A week after 289 criminal charges were filed in a wide-ranging government corruption probe, a group of lawmakers yesterday called for a special legislative session devoted solely to restoring the public's faith in Harrisburg.
"There is a crisis of confidence in Pennsylvania. . . . We must respond with action," said Sen. Jeffrey Piccola (R., Dauphin) who was joined by eight other members of the House and Senate who are pushing for a special session dubbed "Governmental and Ethics Reform."

Said Rep. Eugene DePasquale (D., York), "We are under a dark cloud. . . . We need to get back to the people's work."

The group yesterday called on Gov. Rendell to convene such a session beginning in September. Rendell recently made clear he has no plans of doing so on his own, arguing that the legislative agenda for the rest of the year is already crammed with other key bills.

Anticipating that Rendell might not call a special session, the lawmakers yesterday began collecting signatures of their colleagues to force the issue. A governor must call a special session if the majority of the 203-member House and 50-member Senate ask for one.


http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20080717_Pa__lawmakers_seek_special_session_on_ethics_reform.html

Update: House rep. latest to propose legislation for a PA Constitutional Convention. He doesn't give any reason why. Just, of course, calls it a citizens' convention, like the so-called "reformers" want.

House bill would call citizens' convention
%%headline%% "The integrity of this institution has sunk drastically in the eyes of Pennsylvanians." Rep. Curt Schroder, R- Chester
Sunday, August 10, 2008
BY DAVID SPETT
For The Patriot-News

http://www.pennlive.com/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1218324306137480.xml&coll=1

will someone please explain why dissatisfaction as noted in yet another poll with our state legislators translates into the need for a PA Constitutional Convention? Isn't it the state legislators who are ignorant of their Constitutional duties, that's why people are upset with them?

Let's see if the polltakers go out and vote in large enough numbers to send many many more incumbents back home for good over the next few elections. Are the people really as upset as those who are afforded an opportunity to answer a poll?

Update: Actually, contrary to IssuesPA introduction on the idea of a PA Con-Con, there has not been MUCH talk about a PA Constitutional Convention in the towns and cities and rural areas across Pennnsylvania.

There has been much much much talk about the corruption of our PA state legislators.

A PA Con-Con has been discussed on several blogs, including Net the Truth Online, (our position remains, a convention would be dangerous and has every reason to become runaway, despite an enabling act to limit delegates precisely due to the power granted delegates in the Declaration of Rights Section 2) with a mere "handful" of individuals pressing for a convention. One has to wonder about the motives of such individuals who began this push for a convention within the same month back in July 2005 that the furor arose over the state legislators passing themselves a pay increase, and then voting to take the increases, during their term of office, in the form of unvouchered expenses.

All the while crying for the public to "kick them all out," came whispered talk about a PA Con-Con.

The general public has not been informally as of yet asked if they even know what all a PA Convention would be about in any poll that we're aware.

Issues PA has unfortunately done a disservice by claiming a larger faction of the public is desirous of a convention.

On the other side of the coin, Issues PA does indeed raise some excellent questions and concerns about the process.

Those questions and concerns should be specifically addressed before any formal referendum is placed on the ballot to actually call a convention.

To date, our major question has not been addressed by anyone at anytime.

Can a convention called into session and "limited" by an "enabling act" become a runaway convention specifically per Section 2 of the PA Convention's Declaration of Roights?

Here's what the section states:

Section 2. Political Powers
All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.

Now we have raised the potential that even if the referendum question on the ballot to call the convention contains specific language which "limits" the convention, the delegates sent to the convention will still have the full power to "act" on behalf of the people, and if the delegates determine at that time, the government needs not only some more restraint, it also needs abolished, the delegates can indeed do so in the convention. They could also craft an entirely new and different PA Constitution in order to "create" a new and improved government.

So it is our belief Section 2 itself CANNOT BE LIMITED OR RESTRAINED BY ANY ENABLING ACT the legislature devises.

Therein is the unanswered question that will remain unanswered until such delegates act per the Declaration of Rights Section 2.

In other words, there is danger in a convention precisely because the delegates do have power according to the PA Constitution's Section 2 of the Declaration of Rights.

Plus, we don't need a convention to handle even one or any of the proposals deemed so critical to open government or good government. Any state legislator has the power and resources to craft legislation addressing all of the so-called reform proposals, and such can be presented to the public if warranted as an Amendment, or Amendments.

Net the Truth Online

(March 2008) There has been much talk recently about a constitutional convention in Pennsylvania.

http://www.issuespa.net/articles/22183

Update. Notice a popular statewide website grassrootspa has posted opinions about the matter of a call for a PA Convention. Now really, if the measure were SO POPULAR WITH THE PEOPLE wouldn't the popular site contain thousands upon thousands of similar opinions?

16 posts. Made by a total so far of 9 count em, 9 individuals. That's just such a whimper. Yet, we are to believe there is an overwhelming cry for a PA Constitutional Convention, mind you, because our state legislators are ethically challenged, corrupted, even the newcomers aren't supported as they were when they first took office because they've followed the leader... Isn't it time to roll up the sleeves and talk to our neighbors and family and get them to recall them by voting them out in November?

Net the Truth Online

Grassroots PA DISCUSSION

http://grassrootspa.com/?p=6134

Before the recess, and shortly after, some of these same legislators were already calling for a special session on "corruption" in the wake of rumors of indictments and subsequent indictments pertaining to "bonusgate."

Bonusgate reawakens call for reform
Published: Sunday, July 20, 2008

It feels like the fall of 2005 all over again with state lawmakers tripping over themselves to introduce a new wave of reform bills. Many are calling anew for a special legislative session on ethics and reform or, more far-reaching, a constitutional convention.

Only this time the impetus for the clarion call is Round One of the Bonusgate charges, not the legislative pay raise.

http://www.standardspeaker.com/articles/2008/07/20/news/hz_standspeak.20080720.a.pg6

.hz20_swift_s1.1823586_loc.txt

Question? Why a special session on corruption? What is the legislature going to do in a special session it cannot do by foregoing a recess and pressing on with the public's business throughout the summer? Legislators could have refused to recess at the call of the leadership in order to press on with the reform measures long discussed.

In fact, several bills had been presented to do many of the things reformers wanted, such as reducing the size of the state legislature. Our legislators could have remained in session to take care of the peoples' agenda, not their own agendas.

Senator Jeffrey Piccola is among those who don't think a mere special session on corruption or legislative reform is enough.

Podcast
7/16/08 - State Senator Jeff Piccola (R-15) discusses his call for a special legislative session on government reform and ethical reform

http://www.pasenategop.com/podcasts.htm

Previously, just a month ago, before recessing, two state legislators came out pushing for convening a Constitutional Convention.

Galloway, King say proposed special session on reform is not enough

Lawmakers call for constitutional convention, say legislature unlikely to fully reform itself

http://www.pahouse.com/pr/140071708.asp

Monday, July 14, 2008
Pa. lawmakers call for constitutional conventionPhiladelphia Business Journal

http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2008/07/14/daily9.html

Now it's pretty much a given the special session will be intended to encompass more than corruption issues.

Legislative reform is the new phrasing.

After listing a number of measures the state legislators should consider in a special session, Piccola writes

...In my opinion the only hope of ever enacting any of these constitutional reforms is a Constitutional Convention.

http://www.commonwealthfoundation.org/commentary/special-session-can-rebuild-trust-government

Senator Jeffrey Piccola notes he believes a 90-day window before the Fall election is not enough time for the state legislature to pass and enact these reform measures.

http://yorkdispatch.inyork.com/yd/viewpoints/oped/ci_9982624

He's circulating a petition among legislators to meet in the special session.

And what is the guise of the special session? Ethics.

Piccola has already proposed legislation to call for convening a PA Constitutional Convention.

A special session will no doubt enable the legislators in the special session to craft a referendum question for the Fall ballot to enable calling a Constitutional Convention for PA.

That idea for a convention nicely called a "citizens' constitutional convention" has been circulating for a few years heavily pumped by Russ Diamond and Tim Potts, and a handful of mostly Harrisburg or vicinity based "good government" organizations.

In fact, way back in July of 2005, there was talk of a convention. And when Diamond sought to obtain enough signatures to place his name on the independent category for the Governor of PA, his major platform issue was the convening of a citizens' convention.

We've discussed as many of those efforts as we came across in the past on our site.

The people may be convinced that the state legislators can't pass these reform measures - whatever they may be at any given moment in time - now it's ethic constraints - in a special session or any other way on their own as they have been slow on many proposals such as reducing the size of the state legislature.

But so what if the process is slow and deliberative. It should be.

And for the public servants to act the public must pressure them to act.

Yet, many stay home during elections and complain later how "bad" and corrupt Harrisburg representatives are.

The PA Constitution is not at fault for law-breaking and corrupted elected public officials. What don't reformers and Galloway, King, and Piccola not understand?

Many news editorials have already jumped on the bandwagon of support as well.

At a Brookings Institution forum, according to journalist John Baer, who was invited to attend:

Another thought, from Rick Stafford, a Carnegie Mellon public-policy professor who served as Gov. Dick Thornburgh's secretary of legislative affairs: Create a Constitutional Convention contest, again funded by foundations, among the state's 250-plus colleges and universities.

http://www.philly.com/dailynews/columnists/john_baer/20080723_John_Baer__Pa__Legislature__Too_bad__so_sad.html

How about instead of getting students to discuss what some think needs alteration because corrupt people end up in office, we get students to discuss what kind of character flaws apparantly exist in a whole array of elected public officials no matter their background, education, or political persuasion in the two-party system.

Beware

We don't need a special session on corruption, ethics, legislative reform, or anything else that will be not only hurried, but will silence for a time critics of the true problem in state government.

The people we elect who do not follow the current state Constitution. They are the problem.

There are dangers in a convention process among which is the possibility for altering our form of government from a guaranteed republican form to something else.

Beware of a special session on corruption, ethics, or legislative reform.

Beware Senator Jeffrey Piccola's Proposal for a Special Session on "Ethics."

Beware the setup.

Legislature's reform efforts get low marks
Sunday, July 13, 2008
By Tom Barnes, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08195/896762-454.stm

Beware of editorials presenting one side but not the full 'revision' side of the PA Constitution - the potential exists as we've discussed here at Net the Truth Online.

End of corruption: Convene a convention

...Legislative wiener weasels want a special session to address "ethics reform." What a joke. It's time for a state constitutional convention to begin the process of decommissioning this corrupt enterprise.

Oh, indeed, such an endeavor could be a double-edged sword. The reprobates might gain even more power. But this is a risk worth taking and a fight worth picking because it's past time for Pennsylvanians to reclaim their government.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/mostread/s_578336.html

We can decommission the corrupt and their corrupt enterprise without a convention. It's called voting in an election against the incumbent lawbreaker.

Maybe the Tribune-Review is ok with the risk of 'retrobates' gaining more power via convention measures, but many of us are not willing to risk drastic alteration of our foundation of republican government via a convention which could become unlimited in session.

Beware of those such as the Commonwealth Foundation who claim nothing bad will come out of a special session on legislative reform. The organization has longstanding efforts to initiative and referendum measures - and states in this release a convention should be called. Don't be shocked when the special session permits the referendum question and choosing delegates during the same election cycle!

They did it when they passed payraises during a session in which they served (which was actually Constitutional) and took the payraises with few exceptions in the form of unvouchered expenses during the same session in which they passed the payraises (which wasn't Constitutional).

Sunday, July 20, 2008
Why have a special session on reform?

A special session forces lawmakers to take a stand. The only reason to oppose a special session would be to stifle any potential reform. If there is momentum to call a special session (i.e. 26 Senators and 102 Representatives signing on), then there should be momentum to enact substantive reform - such as calling a constitutional convention or initiative and referendum.

http://cfpolicyblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/why-have-special-session-on-reform.html

With the encouragement of the reformers to convene a convention, the legislators would like nothing better than to draw attention to so-called structural constitutional "defects" rather than to their own personal defects and low marks for character.

The defects which caused an overwhelming amout to vote for unconstitutional unvouchered expenses and actually put the money in their pockets!

Defects which cause an overwhelming amount with few dissents to reauthorize an expansion of the unconstitutional tax-forgiveness program known as Keystone Opportunity Zones.

The same defects that cause an overwhelming amount to time and time again ignore the PA Constitution's restraints in a range of categories from creating public debt in the form of bond issues - notice those have to pass with the people's consent from time to time because the Constitution requires a balanced budget. They have to create debt so they can on paper present a balanced budget.

Send a clear message to them and to the media which is salivating for a historical convention. (something to write about, my dear with travel allowance) Show up in November and kick out any and all who have not followed the PA Constitution in many regards.

Send far more than 50 of them back to other jobs back home. If they can be trusted in any. Maybe we'll be fortunate enough that their like won't be returning to Harrisburg in the guise of new and different reformers who promise whatever reform they think will "satisfy" the people, but don't deliver on upholding the PA Constitution.

They promise to uphold all of the PA Constitution, including the uniformity clause, and don't.

Vote them all out. Then we can start from a new base, without the need of a new and revised PA Constitution.

A new base of people who adhere to their oath of office and the constitutional constraints placed upon them, not us.


Net the Truth Online

Senator Piccola

Constitutional Convention key to legislative reform
Article Last Updated: 07/24/2008

...This session should last only four or five weeks this fall before the elections. We should be in session five days a week and pass bills that will start to restore the people's confidence in state government.

The following are but a few of the subjects we should act upon:

---Require annual and outside forensic audits of all legislative accounts.

---Establish an Office of Inspector General for the General Assembly.

---Prohibit bonuses for any commonwealth employees

--- Ban gifts to legislators from lobbyists and their principals.

---Campaign finance reform.

A number of reform amendments to the state constitution have been proposed such as eliminating sine die (lame duck) sessions, reducing the size of the legislature, reapportionment reform and germ limits.

None of these constitutional proposals have advanced very far in the current session.

Because the special session will be within 90 days of the General Election, they could not be considered due to time constraints contained in our state Constitution.

However, this special session could call for a Constitutional Convention to consider these structural reforms to state government. In my opinion the only hope of ever enacting any of these constitutional reforms is a Constitutional Convention.

This is far from an exhaustive list of the issues that could be considered by the Special Session. The General Assembly does in fact have many good women and men who are there for the right reasons.

http://yorkdispatch.inyork.com/yd/viewpoints/oped/ci_9982624

Poll: Voters don't believe lawmakers will stop corruption
By Brad Bumsted
STATE CAPITOL REPORTER
Tuesday, August 5, 2008

HARRISBURG -- Three of four Pennsylvanians aren't convinced the state Legislature will fix apparent corruption problems that surfaced in an ongoing grand jury investigation, a poll released today shows.
By a 5-1 margin, voters also say House Majority Leader Bill DeWeese, D-Greene County, should step down from his leadership post in the wake of criminal charges that rocked the Capitol last month, according to the poll by Quinnipiac University.

Attorney General Tom Corbett on July 10 filed theft, criminal conspiracy and conflict of interest charges against DeWeese's former chief of staff Mike Manzo, former Democratic Whip Mike Veon of Beaver Falls, Democratic Rep. Sean Ramaley of Economy, and 10 Democratic staffers.

The poll of 1,580 voters has a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points. The survey was conducted from July 30 to Aug. 3...

...The poll also showed:

• 73 percent of those polled blame Democrats and Republicans equally for alleged corruption.

• 76 percent believe Gov. Ed Rendell should call a special session this summer on legislative reform.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_581226.html

Rendell pressed to call Legislature to session on ethics
Monday, July 14, 2008
By Tom Barnes, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau
HARRISBURG -- A state senator from Harrisburg will ask Gov. Ed Rendell today to call a special session of the Legislature for September-October to revise General Assembly ethics and try to restore public confidence in the wake of the widening "bonusgate" scandal.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08196/896959-85.stm

Rendell Rejects A Special Session on Public Integrity

http://papundits.wordpress.com/category/states/pennsylvania/pa-government/pa-executive-branch/

More talking about corruption but instead of saying hey kick "them" out, people, are intent on a convention call

http://www.pennlive.com/columns/patriotnews/review/

Need a Con-Con for structural reforms Conservative Goddess

http://grassrootspa.com/?p=4886

Cohen also voted against a study of a Constitutional Convention supported by most Democrats and opposed by most Republicans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_B._Cohen

Response pacleansweep: A reflection upon a Pa. convention

Previously, Net the Truth Online posted a comment concerning Sentinel, June 8, 2007 editorial, A reflection upon a Pa. convention

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/06/pa-convention-precedent.html

June 22, 2007
Re: A reflection upon a Pa. convention

You're asking a question that shows you continue to ignore what I have
cited how many times. Pennsylvania Constitution Article 1 Section 2. It
means what it say, it really really does. (Truth Net)

Why is it that there were no problems with the limitations of the
convention in 1967? (Russ Diamond)

Truth Net

Those delegates didn't choose to carry out all of PA Article 1 Section
2.

Funny about evidence v. testimony, still pondering...

As you know then from reading Robert F. Williams written testimony
entitled:

A LIMITED CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION IN PENNSYLVANIA? .

Footnote 32. "As the 1947 example makes clear, the line between
constitutional revision and constitutional amendment can be hazy.
Delegates at a limited constitutional convention may propose a new
document, even though certain issues were taken off the table before the
convention met." (Footnote 32 Williams)

To return to your question, the 1967 convention didn't propose a new
document, even though certain issues were taken off the table before the
convention met.

Why didn't they? Maybe those still living will come out and explain
their reasoning, thus settling the question for you.

Again, Article 1 Section 2 says what it means.

The incontrovertible fact is this: our PA Constitution is the supreme
law of the PA land.

Despite the adoption of such language limiting a convention, a huge door
opens wide for Article 1 Section 2 to trump the referendum and provide
delegates with legal ground to consider other than what they have been
limited to.

Also go back to Footnote 32 (Williams )the line between constitutional
revision and constitutional amendment can be hazy

Did you read all of the Hoar sections?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17308

{115} From all the foregoing we see that the legislature probably hasno
power to restrict either an authorized or a popular convention;whenever
it has succeeded, this has been due more to force ofcircumstances than
to legal rights. Even the power to imposereasonable restrictions is
doubtful...http://www.constitution.org/rsh/concon09.htm#09-03There is
another factor which makes PA unique and opens up the potential for
delegates to go beyond limitations.

It is odd you will continue to tout the precedent for a convention which
remained limited in PA history, but you refuse to consider the other PA
precedents.

Precedent - in Pennsylvania. 1873-74

(See Bruce Ledewitz reference discussed at PA Con-Con Limited Scope May
Not Be Possible

may-not-be.html>

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/06/pa-con-con-limited-scope-m\
ay-not-be.html
may-not-be.html>

The Pennsylvania 1776 constitutional convention is what I brought up
previously on my blog, Net the Truth Online.

So your statement is inaccurate:

This second section of his testimony is very instructive in >
differentiating between federal and state conventions (and previously >
on your blog, you've brought up the federal Philadelphia Convention > of
1787 to underscore your argument, so I think examination of the >
differences between them is warranted), but here are two pertinient >
points from the testimony to our discussion here:

I never brought up the "federal" Philadelphia Convention of 1787. I
pointed out that the PA Philadelphia Convention set a precedent for
future Pennsylvania constitutional conventions.

Since you have been mistaken about that, I am wondering whether you
either missed Williams footnote 32 altogether, or possibly you've
mentally blocked out the glaring "...Delegates at a limited
constitutional convention may propose a new document, even though
certain issues were taken off the table before the convention met.".

That is exactly what PA Constitution Article 1 Section 2 not only
permits, the law of the land remains the law of the land in the face of
enabling acts, the threat of intervention by the PA Supreme Court, or an
injunction brought by any citizen, or any other device to attempt to
prevent a limited Pennsylvania convention from turning unlimited and
proposing a "new document."

The courts are to abide by what is "constitutional."

Article 1 Section 2 stands before the PA Con-Con convenes.

An enabling act which limits delegates from carrying out again the
Constitution of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania's Article 1 Section 2
could if challenged be found to be "unconstitutional."

Such a challenge to an enabling act has not yet occurred in the state of
Pennsylvania - but then again, Pennsylvania is noted for a lot of
"firsts."

Wouldn't it be interesting if there were just such a counter movement to
a "limited" convention afoot?.

Oh wait. I think I hear cheering from Democracy Rising PA

I wonder how many delegates to a PA Constitutional Convention will be
voted in by like-minded voters? Don't you?

Truth Net

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17412

Russ Diamond response June 22, 2007

Re: A reflection upon a Pa. convention


--- In pacleansweep@yahoogroups.com, "Truth Net" wrote:
>
>
> You're asking a question that shows you continue to ignore what I have
> cited how many times. Pennsylvania Constitution Article 1 Section 2.
It
> means what it say, it really really does.

No doubt, but you are throwing tons of red herrings at this discussion.

Since the people, at the ballot box, affirm the limitations of the Act
and the people, by petition, nominate the candidates and the people, at
the ballot box, select the delegates and the people, at the ballot box,
either ratify or decline the convention's proposals, and the people,
thru today's media, will have easy access to the entire proceedings and
the people, through the courts, could challenge the legitimacy of the
proceedings, I believe folks will be very well informed about the whole
process and have lots of opportunities to intervene if things go awry.

And I have continually stated that I would be the first to act to
intervene if that happens.

You continually refer to Article 1 Section 2, but for some reason don't
seem to actually trust the people with the very power which is theirs
inherently.

Yes, indeed, the entire process must be watched like a hawk by ALL
Pennsylvanians.

Now that you have slipped the Democracy Rising reference in there, I
know exactly who you are and realize that you are one of the folks that
was banned from this forum before for making the outlandish claims that
PACleanSweep is somehow an instrument of George Soros & Co.

Believe me, I do not agree with Democracy Rising's 'wild west' desires
to have a total general convention. Tim & I have knocked heads on this
on numerous occasions. But I will tell you that Tim also now realizes
that NOT taking Article 1 off the table is a sure way to make sure we
don't get a ConCon.

Conspiracy theories are fine for those who wish to scare people, but
they just won't work here. Caution is certainly warranted, but hysteria
is not.

Cheers!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17413

June 25, 2007 Truth Net response not posted guess cause Truth Net is part of a grand conspiracy-minded set of "the people."

No it's you who don't trust "the people" to desire to alter, reform, or abolish government.

The people don't stop being "the people" once they have voted in "delegates" and once they (may) have authorized a limited convention. That is what you don't seem to want to understand.

Our PA Constitution is very clear in Article 1 Section 2, but you continue to slant the section to suit you.

All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.

At all times an inalienable and indefeasible right - that is so clear, but unfortunately, to veil the potential for delegates in convention to continue to act as "the people" many theorize that limitations can be placed beforehand and all will be followed.

Our state also has precedent, and that is ignored as well.

As to your charge you know who I am and realize that you are one of the folks that
> was banned from this forum before for making the outlandish claims that
> PACleanSweep is somehow an instrument of George Soros & Co.

Again, you are mistaken. I have never joined this site previously, and have never been banned from this site.

There is no hysteria, just finding truth. And the truth you cannot deny is that a limited convention always and forever more will have the potential to become unlimited, during the convention process., precisely because of Article 1 Section 2.

What happens after the convention becomes unlimited is up for further discussion.

Truth Net

Original post Net the Truth Online

Found the same editorial today June 13, 2007 posted to the PA Clean Sweep message board with a comment inserted by Russ Diamond, and I commented on the board as "truthnet."

More will follow, including addressing the testimony of Robert Williams, A Limited Constitutional Convention in Pennsylvania?

Hint: Williams states: "Finally, it is important to point out that in a few states whose constitutions contain no provisions whatsoever concerning constitutional conventions, there are no requirements and no restrictions. This leaves maximum flexibility to the legislature and the people."...

PA Cleansweep note is Russ Diamond commentary on the Sentinel editorial...

June 11, 2007

Re: pacleansweep: A reflection upon a Pa. convention

Note from Russ: What happened with Article I in 1873 CAN be prevented
today.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17302

Truth Net submitted 6-13-07 and posted on the PA Clean Sweep Message Board

Russ's note is left unexplained:

Note from Russ: What happened with Article I in 1873 CAN be prevented today.
How can delegates be prevented from going beyond limitations, once the delegates are "convened" in a convention and thereby within that convention setting have the power to establish their own "rules, and as well have a power exclusive to them?" That power being the ultimate according to the same section cited as the basis to call a convention.

Article 1 Section 2. All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.

In the PA Constitutional Convention, the delegates, the people, have the inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, OR ABOLISH, their government...

The PA Constitutional Convention may be limited upfront by a "legislative" enabling act, but while in the convention process, delegates can indeed go beyond any "restrictions" based on precedent of past conventions and even more pertinently, the concept of convention "sovereignty."

More importantly, the question arises whether (during the convention proceedings) delegates have to be constrained by "precedents" or actions of past conventions.If the delegates are to have the same power delegates in past conventions had, they should have the power to set their own "precedent," shouldn't they? That means a potential to ignore limitations in any area such limitations may be "preset" by "legislative" enabling acts.

A look to Hoar's discussion of issues surrounding convening of conventions reveals the statement:

{115} From all the foregoing we see that the legislature probably has no power to restrict either an authorized or a popular convention; whenever it has succeeded, this has been due more to force of circumstances than to legal rights. Even the power to impose reasonable restrictions is doubtful...

http://www.constitution.org/rsh/concon09.htm#09-03

ROGER SHERMAN HOAR CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS THEIR NATURE, POWER, AND LIMITATIONS
http://www.constitution.org/rsh/

Nobody has a crystal ball as to what will happen after the convention ends its deliberations and has altered, reformed, or abolished its government, either. If the "new" Constitution is sent back to the people for ratification, delegates would naturally lobby in support of their reasoning for going beyond the enabling act. The electorate could weigh in favor of the changes and ratify what was sent to them, even though they "authorized" initially, it could be argued, a limited convention, excluding Article I.

As far as the courts intervening during the convention, Hoar includes fascinating discussion and leaves more than a little room for doubt that courts would or could intervene.

If the electorate ratifies the new PA Constitution, it could further be argued the courts will not find any basis to overturn such ratification by "the people."
Furthermore, there is a potential for the delegates to choose a new method for ratification.

What this all boils down to is nobody can predict the outcome of a PA Constitutional Convention which has the power to alter, reform, or abolish its government.

(truthnet) (Net the Truth Online)

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17406

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17308

Follow-up

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17309

June 15, 2007

Re: A reflection upon a Pa. convention
Thank you for permitting the posting to go through without my being a
member. I have since joined and been accepted.

Before beginning to respond, would you please give the courtesy of
providing the specific resource for your statement which includes the
term evidence:

You've made a specific statement that "evidence" has been provided to
the Senate State Government Committee showing that such limitations can
be, and have been, enforced.

It would be important to the continuation of this discussion for you to
pinpoint the "evidence" that has been provided to the Senate State
Government Committee, evidence showing that such limitations can be, and
have been, enforced. More importantly, it would be helpful to pinpoint
evidence which shows that such limitations "have been" enforced, in past
conventions, conventions which occurred in the state of Pennsylvania.

By providing this information upfront, we can begin from the same base
of at least one resource which you provide.

Thank you for the courtesy.

As I respond, I will cite my resources in my posts, as I did in my
initial message.

You have stated:

There was a challenge to the convention of 1873, but it was filed too
late. The PA Supreme Court held (and rightly so) that it could not
overturn that convention's findings, as
> the sovereign people had already ratified them. But it also noted
> that a challenge filed in a timely manner would have been actionable.

As well, would you provide your resource for the statement that the
Court also noted that a challenge filed in a timely manner would have
been "actionable."

This is extremely important as the resource I cited contains pertinent
discussion on Court interventions - particularly in regard to a state's
existing provisions contained in its Constitution for "conventions', and
there would be a difference between what is and is not actionable in
theory and in reality.

Also, I plugged in the url to the link you provided but it came up page
not found

http://www.pacleansweep.com/concon07.html


Truth Net Online

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17327

June 18, 2007

You've made a statement that "Evidence" was presented during testimony
to the committee.

Don't you think you should supply more specifics rather than a
generality? If not, why not?

If you are relying on one person's testimony to enable you to make such
unequivocal statements, then why not cite the individual and provide
quotes?

Specifically, exactly what testimony has been provided to the Senate
State Government Committee that reveals "evidence" showing that such
limitations can be, and have been, enforced.

What evidence provided to the committee supports your statement

what happened with Article 1 in 1873 CAN be prevented today

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17309


Why not cite specifically, so the testimony and the basis of the
testimony may be checked?

I'm particularly interested in a supportive resource for the statement
evidence showing that such limitations "have been" enforced.

I'm interested to know if you are relying upon limitations other states
than PA have enforced, states whose Constitutions already contain
language pertaining to constitutional conventions. As you know, our PA
Constitution is silent thereon.

Roger Sherman Hoar's work provides enlightening discussion of just such
instances.

Another resource I will cite when I respond is the Pennsylvania
Constitution itself. And in particular, I will cite Article 1 Section
2.
Political Powers
Section 2.
All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are
founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and
happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an
inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their
government in such manner as they may think proper.

http://sites.state.pa.us/PA_Constitution.html


Note I'm at this time asking for you to identify "evidence" you state
has been provided...

However, this is the complete paragraph..:

As a statute, it would be enforced by threat of court intervention
instigated by any PA citizen. That threat would loom over the
convention right up until the voters cast their ballots on whatever
proposals the convention puts before them. Evidence has been provided
to the Senate State Government Committee showing that such
limitations can be, and have been, enforced.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17309


Please additionally clarify how a statute would be enforced by threat of
court intervention instigated by any PA citizen.

You use the term would be - what is your supportive resource that a
statute would be enforced by "threat" of court intervention?

Please provide the evidence for such, as you state has been provided to
the Senate State Government Committee.

Also, the link doesn't work. Page not found.

http://www.pacleansweep.com/concon07.html


Truth Net

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17351

June 21, 2007

Re: A reflection upon a Pa. convention



I find it surprising you don't recall the man's name who you have
maintained provided evidence which supports your statement

what happened with Article 1 in 1873 CAN be prevented today

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17309


You don't have to recall every single word that was said, just back up
your claim that "evidence" was presented to the committee which supports
your position - your position being that what happened in 1873 CAN be
prevented today. Surely, you hava a copy of written testimony from
Piccola's office yourself and can recheck to jog your memory of the
"gentleman" whose name you can't recall.

Now you're making another statement:

...I'm sure you could ask for an emergency
> injunction to stop the proceedings or at least stop the particular
> discussion which overreaches the limitations...

An emergency injunction - where is your evidence for that?

Truth Net

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/17405

Related

Officials hold 3d hearing on revamping Pa. governmentTwo state senators listened to expert witnesses discussing the need for a constitutional convention.
By Vernon Clark
Inquirer Staff Writer

At the University of Pennsylvania Law School, two state senators heard testimony yesterday on the convening of a constitutional convention for the reform of state government.

State Sens. Jeffrey E. Piccola (R., Dauphin) and Michael Folmer (R., Lebanon) held the third hearing on the topic, listening to the views of three speakers: an area lawyer and author, a Rutgers University law school professor, and the president of the local League of Women Voters...

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/pa/main_line_delaware/20070412_Senators_hear_ideas_on_a_constitutional_convention_for_Pa_.html

PA Study Constitution Undertaken

PA should undertake a study of the PA Constitution - that is, the legislators all of them who take an oath to uphold the state Constitution should study the current Constitutiona and be able to understand its meaning.

Mr. Ledowitz is right. It's folly to hold a constitutional convention which is an outgrowth of dissatisfaction - though I disagree the dissatisfaction is with government - the dissatisfaction is with the elected public servants who broke their oaths to uphold the PA Constitution when they passed a salary increase in 2005 and then took the increases as unvouchered expenses - clearly unconstitutional.

The people were upset, but not upset enough to go out and register anew in large numbers in the following election wherein half the state senate and all the state representatives were up for re-election. Approximately 25 percent only turned out in the two major political party primary to throw the oath-breakers out of office by electing challengers. Many didn't even face a challenger in the primary.

The legislators who are going around pouncing upon the idea of a PA Constitutional Convention want the so-called easy way to look as though they are addressing "something" - when it's their own actions they should be addressing, not so-called structural defects in the PA Constitution.

The PA Constitution didn't make them do it back in 2005 take a pay hike as unvouchered expenses. They did it themselves.

The public needs to be aware of what the PA Constitution says, they need to be informed on the issues, then hold their elected public servants accountable when the "incumbents" break away from the meaning of the PA Constitution.

Duquesne Law School professor Bruce Ledewitz, an expert on the state constitution, said there is not currently a consensus about what a convention should address.

I just don't think you should take general popular dissatisfaction with government , which we have now , and hold a constitutional convention to quote 'do something about it,'" he said.

Pa. House committee supports study of state constitution

By MARK SCOLFORO
The Associated Press

...HARRISBURG, Pa. - A bill to finance a yearlong study of the Pennsylvania Constitution was passed out of a legislative committee Wednesday, potentially a step toward the state's first constitutional convention in four decades.

"We have to ask ourselves some real questions related to the future of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania," the bill's sponsor, Rep. Dwight Evans, D-Philadelphia, told the State Government Committee. "It's high time we had a discussion about where we want to go."

Evans' bill would establish an unpaid 15-member commission, chosen by the governor and legislative leaders, to study the constitution "in light of the contemporary conditions and anticipated problems and needs" of state residents. It would have a $475,000 budget and a year to issue a written report to the governor and Legislature.

Similar commissions were created in 1919, 1935, 1957 and 1963, Evans noted. The commission could recommend specific constitutional amendments or whether to hold a constitutional convention, which most recently was done in 1967-68.

"There's nothing wrong with a little self-reflecting," he said.

The committee approved Evans' bill on an 18-10 vote, with two Republicans joining all Democrats in favor.

Rep. Glenn R. Grell, R-Cumberland, voted against it.

"I think this proposal is too wide-ranging," Grell said. He said the House's standing committees regularly handle constitutional issues and that the Joint State Government Commission, which includes leaders from both the House and Senate, is already in place and "very capable" of a top-to-bottom constitutional study.

"I just am not hearing from my members or people in my district that we need to open the constitution," said Rep. Matthew E. Baker, R-Tioga, who also voted against the bill.

Calls for a constitutional convention have arisen in the reform atmosphere of the past couple years, but the state constitution is silent about exactly how that is done.

All four held since 1790 were initiated by the Legislature. Between 1921 and 1963 voters rejected calling constitutional conventions five times.

Duquesne Law School professor Bruce Ledewitz, an expert on the state constitution, said there is not currently a consensus about what a convention should address.

"I just don't think you should take general popular dissatisfaction with government , which we have now , and hold a constitutional convention to quote 'do something about it,'" he said...

http://cpartyalleghenycounty.blogspot.com/

PA Reform Populists Want Convention Initiatives Referendums

A Pa Convention to alter the PA Constitution, the idea crops up again and again. Why? There's nothing wrong with the Pennsylvania Constitution. The PA Constitution was clear back in July 2005 when the state legislators voted themselves salary increases (completely legal by the way), but at the same time took the increases in the form of unvouchered expenses during the term in which the increases were passed. Unconstitutional.

It was the incumbents, the men and women holding an elected office of public trust who trampled on the already binding and clear tenets of the PA Constitution.

In the meantime, for treatment of the issue of a 2007 PA Con-Con and dangers of an open, general convention and further discussion points visit

http://dirtline.tripod.com/votefix/

good explanation of the sorry affair of the paygrab

http://www.clapper.org/bmc/blog/state-politics/pigs-on-the-wing

What does Tony Phyrillas want again, however, to smack the legislators into reality, yep, a convention and initiatives and referendums. Direct Democracy.

How many times does someone have to point to the framers of the PA Constitution and federal constitution to prove the founders did not create a democracy? Instead, they created a republic, a nation of the rule of law, not the rule of men...

Phyrillas persists in including the convention and initiatives and referendums among a listing of reforms the state legislators should consider as those proposed by the "people."

Actually, the other reform recommendations are not bad, but they can all be done without a convention.

All except for the term limits. Term limits will keep the two-party majority system in place, and shuffling names and faces around every twelve years or whatever the maximum of the term limits will be will only get different names and faces.

The entrenched party ideologies will not change, and those ideologies are exactly where the problems are.

For some reason, Phyrillas just doesn't get it. The same people who have abused the PA Constitution will be the delegates to a convention. Look for PCN to heavily cover the reform recommendations of Democracy Rising, too, with no rebuttal from those who object to convening a PA Constitutional Convention. If it all sounds familiar, it is...

Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Pa. residents finally get a say on reform
Tony Phyrillas
Here's a switch. Pennsylvania lawmakers want to hear what Pennsylvania residents have to say...

A House panel studying the need for legislative reforms has set up an e-mail address where citizens can send their ideas for improving the lawmaking process, according to The Associated Press.

Here's your chance to tell the members of the Pennsylvania House of Lords that it's time to return government to the people.
Here's a few suggestions for ways to reform Harrisburg.

1) Convene a Constitutional Convention as soon as possible
2) Allow for voter Initiative, Referendum and Recall
3) Cut the size of the Legislature in half
4) Eliminate pensions for elected officials and all other lawmaker perks
5) Term limits on legislators, committee chairmen, legislative leaders
6) Redraw legislative districts to make them competitive
7) Real regulation of lobbyists and campaign finances
8) Eliminate legislative 'lame duck' sessions
9) Ban 'ghost voting' and all forms of 'proxy voting'
10) No more midnight votes; Do the people's business in the light of day

http://tonyphyrillas.blogspot.com/2007/01/pa-residents-get-say-on-reform.html

Tony Phyrillas constant refrain...

To make sure that reform is more than just talk, an unusual mix of organizations has formed a coalition that is pushing a "Roadmap to Reform.

"The campaign was announced last week in Harrisburg by nine organizations representing the left, center and right of the political spectrum. The coalition listed 10 ways the legislature can improve the way the people's business is conducted in Harrisburg and it challenged politicians to have the reforms in place before Oct.

1.The organizations proposing the "Roadmap to Reform" are: Common Cause Pennsylvania; Commonwealth Foundation, Democracy Rising PA, League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Citizens for Legislator Accountability, Pennsylvania Council of Churches, Rock the Capital, Stop the Illegal Pay Raise Inc. and Young Conservatives of Pennsylvania.The "Roadmap to Reform" includes steps to make government transparent and elections more competitive, according to Tim Potts, co-founder of Democracy Rising PA.

It also includes a call to convene the state’s first general constitutional convention since 1873.

Key elements of the 'Roadmap' include:

• Banning lawmakers from taking gifts and entertainment from lobbyists.
• Posting all legislative votes for the public within 24 hours.
• Passing an open records law for the legislature.• Requiring the posting of lawmakers' expenditures and salary/benefits information online.
• Making lawmakers' health care insurance benefits consistent with the private sector.
• Banning fund-raisers while the legislature is in session.
• Authorizing and funding a constitutional convention to explore further reform.

It's an ambitious agenda, but why not shoot for the moon? The biggest obstacle to these reforms is the legislators themselves (and Gov. Ed Rendell) who like the status quo in Harrisburg.

Now that the voters have the legislators over a barrel, there's no time like the present to make demands for better government.The complete reform agenda can be reviewed at

www.democracyrisingpa.com...

http://tonyphyrillas.blogspot.com/

at Democracy Rising PA

Lobbyist Control
Ban gifts and entertainment
Quarterly reporting for lobbyists with expenses greater than $2,500 per quarter
Restoration of reporting requirements that were modified in the House.
Over by October
End session on or before October 1 by joint resolution
Propose an amendment to the Constitution to prohibit lame-duck session
Open Record
Require the General Assembly and each of its members to comply fully with existing law to the same degree and in the same detail as required of executive agencies
Require the judicial branch to comply with the Open Records Law
Assign a legislative body the immediate task of re-writing existing law to give
Pennsylvania the highest standards of integrity and openness in America for public access to government documents
Legislator Voting Records
All votes by individual legislator – including committee votes, procedural votes and votes on amendment and final passage – must be posted online within 24 hours with links to the language actually voted upon and the final outcome of the vote
Citizen Opportunity Period (COP)
Require a waiting period of at least 72 hours, preferably two weeks, between final amendment and final passage of all legislation in each chamber
Perks
Provide a monthly, online accounting for each legislator detailing the cost of all salary, benefits and expenses paid during the previous month
Permit per diems for actual expenses only as documented by detailed vouchers that are open to public inspection via the Internet
Prohibit all forms of unvouchered expenses
Adjust health care insurance benefits for lawmakers so that they are consistent with current private sector practices for ordinary workers
Competition
Campaign Finance
Prohibit fundraisers while the Legislature is in session.
Require public reporting of campaign donations one week prior to the primary and general election.
Reapportionment
Enact a requirement for legislative districts to be as politically competitive as possible (in addition to existing requirements)
Elections
Amend election laws so that they level the playing field for all citizens who want to run for public office regardless of party affiliation

Comprehensive Constitutional Change
General Constitutional Convention
Authorize a general constitutional convention at which all sections of the Constitution are available for amendment and to which all interested citizens have an equal opportunity to become delegates

Ballots & access: Party crashers

Why the need for a General Constitutional Convention? That question still has not been asked by any journalist I've read. Tony just goes along, doesn't ask can all of the reforms noted be done by simple legislation adopted by the legislators?

The answer is yes they all can be done by simple legislation, no need for "Comprehensive" Constitutional Change.

Roadmap to Reform May 26, 2006

http://www.democracyrisingpa.com/dr_fans/dr_news/20060526.asp

Isn't it an eye-opening coincidence that the Roadmap to Reform introduction on Democracy Rising PA is entitled United We Stand – “Roadmap to Reform”?

Ross Perot began United We Stand, then changed the name to United We Stand, America back in 1993, or thereabouts. Shortly after Perot backed out of a bid for President of the U.S. as a third-party candidate, rumors crisscrossed the country concerning Perot's support for a national second Constitutional Convention.

Fortunately, "the people" didn't fall for it, and there was no resounding grassroots push for a call for a federal convention, though Pennsylvania leaders at the time did offer a so-called "Conference of the States."

Russ Diamond judiciary constitutional convention and so forth

http://www.pacleansweep.com/amicus.html

Democracy Rising PA Questions and answers

http://www.democracyrisingpa.com/bulletins/response.asp

Providing for initiative, referendum and recall

Jim Panyard - "(One of my campaign promises)"
Russ Diamond - "Yes. As with other issues, we must examine systems in place in other states to determine an appropriate way to allow such democratic input while preserving our republican form of state government."

Russ Diamond Wants the Seat the Better to...

you remember Little Red Riding Hood?

Diamond after a PA Constitutional Convention - still...

Diamond said during the campaign he will continue to hammer home the Republican message of smaller government and reduced spending while advocating for a citizens’ constitutional convention. He also pledged not to accept any legislative perks including a pension, health plan or mid-term pay increases...

http://www.ldnews.com/news/ci_8250335

Beware, beware, beware, beware. See our previous posts on this issue listed in the sidebar under Posts About Limited vs Unlimited PA Con-Con. He ran an unsuccessful bid for Governor of the state as an independent, ignoring his own advice to challenge the incumbent in the Primary, if the incumbent faced no opposition there. He gave some excuse somebody else had planned to run as a Democrat, then bowed out.

Instead of facing the incumbent head-on in the Democrat Primary, he travelled around the state between the time before the Primary, and after the Primary back then, until sometime in March, when he announced his run for that office.

Along the way, he continued to present the idea of a so-called "citizens" Constitutional Convention as one that could be limited.

All the while, he neglected to tell people of information showing such a convention could follow the precedent of a previous PA Convention which was a runaway convention.

See our lengthy response to Diamond Wednesday, June 13, 2007 Response pacleansweep: A reflection upon a Pa. convention which cites Mr. Robert Williams testimony before Senator Piccola's State Government Committee on Calling a PA Constitutional Convention. Williams testimony included a supplementary report, inclusive of footnotes.

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/06/response-pacleansweep-reflection-upon.html

Read the pertinent footnote to determine that Williams allows for the potential of a limited convention having the ability to produce a "new" document, a new PA Constitution.

Maybe it all depends what some say the meaning of "new" is.

Last time we checked, when you leave out info pertinent to decision-making, you are nothing short of like the big wolf in Little Red Riding Hood.

If a person can withhold information in an attempt to convince people to support a PA Constitutional Convention, (it can be limited and remain so, it really really can, trust me) what else will the person withhold to mount a campaign for a political office in Pennsylvania.

Indications from the Lebanon Daily News article are he's already skewing the record of Republican opponent Gingrich.

Activist to take shot at 101st
By JOHN LATIMER
Staff Writer
Lebanon Daily News

The seat is currently occupied by Rep. Mauree Gingrich of Palmyra, who is running for a fourth two-year...

When it comes to reforming how things are done in Harrisburg, Diamond said he is the real deal, while Gingrich just talks the talk.

“I saw in her release (announcing her candidacy) that she said she is an advocate of reform,” he said. “Well, it is easy to say she is an advocate. But I think to be an advocate you have to come up with some ideas of your own. I haven’t seen her leading the pack or shepherding these new reform-minded representatives into an organized, major reform coalition.”

Gingrich dismissed Diamond’s claim this morning, adding that she was not part of the pay grab that led to the reform movement and raised Diamond’s political stature. She noted her past involvement in the Jefferson Reform Initiative — a bipartisan legislative reform group — and her current work on a welfare-reform task force as just two examples of her commitment to improving government. “I’ve always been involved in reform issues,” she said. “That’s part of my life and part of bringing efficiencies to government. .... I’m surprised anyone would make a statement like that. It’s categorically untrue. You only have to look at my voting record to know that. It’s that simple.”

http://www.ldnews.com/news/ci_8250335

(Net the Truth Online)

Activist to take shot at 101st
By JOHN LATIMER
Staff Writer
Lebanon Daily News

The leader of an anti-incumbency reform group that helped oust dozens of state legislators in the wake of the 2005 legislative pay grab is now hoping to become an incumbent himself.

Russ Diamond of Annville, founder of PACleanSweep, announced yesterday that he is running for the Republican nomination to represent the 101st District in the state House. The district represents Leb-anon; the boroughs of Cleona, Mt. Gretna and Palmyra; and the townships of Annville, North Annville, South Annville, North Cornwall, North Londonderry and South Londonderry...

Diamond said during the campaign he will continue to hammer home the Republican message of smaller government and reduced spending while advocating for a citizens’ constitutional convention. He also pledged not to accept any legislative perks including a pension, health plan or mid-term pay increases...

http://www.ldnews.com/news/ci_8250335

Who Says There's No ...
... second, third, no, wait ... fourth? ... acts in American life?
Professional gadfly Russ Diamond writes this morning to let us know he's filed the paperwork for a Republican primary run for state House in Lebanon County's 101st District. The incumbent in that district is state Rep. Mauree Gingrich.
If he's elected, Diamond swears he won't accept a pay raise, pension, perks, office, pens, papers, books or anything else funded by the taxpayers...

http://blogs.mcall.com/capitol_ideas/2008/02/snow-day-wednes.html

See the testimony of Robert Williams before the State Government Committee (Senator Piccola) Contact Senator Piccola for the testimony.

Weekly Column: Calling a Constitutional Convention in Pennsylvania
3/2/2007

http://www.piccola.org/newsreleases/default.asp?NewsReleaseID=1493&SubjectID=

Also see

New Jersey Constitutional Reform
The Law of Limited State Constitutional Conventions
Robert Williams

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:G8nhpg74kQkJ:camlaw.rutgers.edu/statecon/njtaxconvpapers/report7.doc+robert+williams+limited+pennsylvania+constitutional+convention&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

See

Pennsylvania Constitution

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/VC/visitor_info/creating/constitution.htm