« Ind. Decisions - One today from 7th Circuit | Main | Ind. Law - Still more on: Daniels suggests rewriting the entire 1851 Indiana Constitution »

Monday, July 30, 2007

Ind. Law - More on: Daniels suggests rewriting the entire 1851 Indiana Constitution

Earlier today I promised to post some parts of the "Report of the Constitutional Revision Commission 1969." Here it is, a scanned document, 577 K.

Some observations: This was a prestigious group, co-chaired by two former governors, Matt Welsh and Harold Handley. A governor to be, Bob Orr, was a member, as was IU President Elvis Starr. Also Dean Leon Wallace of IU Law, and Bill Ruckelshaus.

This study took place during a time when many states were undertaking updating their constitutions, several through constitutional conventions. I recall receiving a hardbound copy of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Maryland, complete with a full-page color photo of then-governor Spiro Agnew. I still have it somewhere.

Looking through the recommendations, I see that many more of them than I had remembered were not that good, and were not implemented -- they never made it to, or in some cases, through, the General Assembly. But that may be something worth thinking about. If you were to equate this body with a group undertaking a constitutional convention, this might be the kind of mixed result you would get.

As I noted earlier today, there were several endeavors going on simultaneously. The Judicial Revision Commission was completing its revision of Article 7 and this Commission endorsed its recommendations. An effort was underway to change Article 4 so that the General Assembly would meet annually, rather than every two years.

And this group successfully recommended changes to Article 5 that would allow a Governor to serve two consecutive terms, and that would have a party's candidates for Governor and Lt. Governor run as a team. At that time, having a Governor and Lt. Governor of different parties was not unusual.

Near the bottom of page 7 of the document starts a lengthy discussion of the amendment process as opposed to the constitutional convention.

Near the bottom of page 8 you will see this:

Our 1851 Constitution, unlike the 1816 document, contains no provisions for revision by constitutional convention, but does set out in Article 16 the amendatory procedures discussed previously. However, the Indiana Supreme Court has held that the lack of such provisions cannot prohibit the people of our state from requesting a convention if they so desire. Section 1 of Article 1 states, "... the People have, at all times, an indefeasible right to alter and reform their government." Therefore, if a referendum of the citizens of Indiana should indicate the desire for a constitutional convention, the fact that no express provisions for such procedure are set out in our present document could not prohibit the will of the people from being followed.
I don't know why the Supreme Court case referenced is not identified.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on July 30, 2007 07:25 PM
Posted to Indiana Law