Cal Con Con

Why is this good for California, specifically?

 

• California has a tradition of acting like a separate nation from America with values that are not shared with America, such as opposing American invasions in Vietnam and Iraq, protecting Undocumented Immigrants, allowing LGBTQ people the ability to feel safe on University campuses, along with working to mitigate Climate Change, legalizing medicinal and recreational marijuana, recognizing the Genocide of Armenian peoples by Turkey, and banning cruel treatment of animals by banning certain practices, such as the preparation of the dish Foie Gras, to name a few examples.

• This independence trend has only increased in intensity - if you consider the following recent examples, where California has wanted to;

  • Collaborate internationally to reduce Climate Crisis, pursue Stem Cell Research, reject Common Core Education tests when they were pushed by the Federal government under America’s leader George W Bush. We have had to comply, against our better judgment and against scientific facts.

  • Legalize Marijuana under America’s leader Barack Obama. We were unable to do anything but State legalization and protection.

  • Give immigrants much-needed security, rather than behave in a hostile manner towards them. In that spirit, we also do not see the value in creating a wall across the Southern border with Mexico. And yet, America's current administration, under Donald Trump’s leadership, is directing America to do these things. We do not wish to be a series of Sanctuary Cities but, rather, a Sanctuary State, or Nation.

  • Protect the Environment, rather than collude in exacerbating Climate Crisis. This contrasts with the new political regime in America.

  • Protect women’s health and professional rights, as well as all people’s rights to love and marry whomever they want, in contrast to the new political regime in America.

  • Improve the political process, with increased transparency and more ease of public involvement in decision making, in contrast to the new political regime in America.

  • This trend of California “butting heads” with the American Federal government will continue – so California recognizes the need to limit the power that the Federal Government currently has to interfere with its smooth running. Being a separate Nation protects our values and our assets, and may be a necessary step, which is why this Constitutional convention is important because it will give California a clear path to this ultimate “backup plan”. However, the Constitutional Convention will also give California a less radical solution, which is allowing California to be able to not follow certain Federal laws that are directly in contradiction with California values.

 

Do this mean conservative States of USA can change the constitution in a way that is out of line with CA values?

 

• Yes. That is democracy. If California wishes to ensure its own values, it has to allow America to make its own choices, as its citizens see fit. However, California is going to create a "safety switch" when it goes to the Con Con, and demand that there is a reasonable path for any state to secede from America if it wants. If the Con Con creates conditions that are too harsh for California, then California will have the ability (from participating in the ConCon) to leave America and not be part of the new American legal structure created by the Con Con.

• Yes, a Constitutional Convention opens up the ability for conservatives to remake America in their image, however CA by participating in the Constitutional Convention, can mitigate and limit the negative impact of policies that could repeal social progress in America. If the Con Con happens without us (and it will happen with, or without, us), we will have NO SAY in what happens next and progressive values become even more vulnerable. California’s participation in a Constitutional Convention is our window of opportunity to protect at least some of America’s land, people and values from the American political threat. If we ultimately secede, then we stood up for the values that some of our liberal brothers and sisters hold, in other parts of USA, on their behalf - at a time when it matters most, and when we could. Count on California pushing for the American law to back up CA values at the Con-Con.

 

How does this help Calexit? Or does it?

 

• The number one complaint against the Calexit secession movement is that the rest of America will have to approve CA secession, and that it isn’t just as simple as Californians agree to leave America. California, by calling for a Constitutional Convention, directly addresses this critique.

• The Calexit movement has always dealt with the image that it is a bunch of “California dreamers” who do not actually understand the way that government works. By filing an initiative of this detail and with this kind of reach, through two governments, we are demonstrating that when dreamers ACT they become ACTIVISTS. We could not do this successfully without a detailed knowledge of the law. By following due process we demonstrate that Californians are intelligent, socially innovative visionaries, not just dreamers. Knowledge is power.

• By filing an initiative in California that is designed to attract the support of conservative states of America, we increase the likelihood of the initiative's success.  When conservative American states support this initiative, which indirectly creates a pathway for secession, it will be the first time that a majority of America have talked positively, in any capacity, about the idea of CA being able to leave America. This answers the other critique of the Calexit movement - that America will never allow CA to leave.

• Having conservative states support a California initiative also means that this initiative will stay in the news longer - because it will likely be discussed by newspapers in 30 different states outside of CA. This can drastically increase Californians' support of this initiative, seeing USA support the call for a Convention. This only increases the potential for a Constitutional Convention to happen.

• Having American people talk about the idea of CA secession positively, and having the news say that CA is actually doing the correct thing in order to actually leave America – raises the profile of the Calexit idea to levels it has never seen before. This higher profile of respect will bring many new Californians to support a possible path to Calexit who never supported the idea of CA leaving America under any conditions before - because they will believe it could actually happen and is not any longer just a “dream” i.e. It has become reasonable.

• While ⅓ of CA supported Calexit in polls over a solid three month period a majority of Californians never came around to supporting secession. However, at the same time as polling about a Calexit was done, other polls asked Californians if they would want to ignore Federal law on immigration and Climate change and ⅔  of Californians said yes. Ignoring the Federal government’s laws is secession but because that word was not used a majority of Californians supported acts that were secessionist in nature. What this shows is that the word secession is very strong, and with this word removed, or put to the background of an idea, a majority of Californians are willing to support the act of being an independent California nation. This initiative is designed to reach out to those Californians who like the activities included in secession but not the word.

 

Why will this succeed?

 

• More states of the American Federal government have said they support a Con Con than at any time before in the last couple decades.

• California is a huge “state” and it is very liberal – so when it comes to the support of a Con Con, newspapers, in general, will cover this initiative because it is very strange that liberal California would support something that American states, that believe in conservative values, are talking about.   

• News in the nearly 30 states of America that already support a Con Con – will also talk about this CA initiative because it makes what they want more likely to happen – because large California is now supporting the cause.

• The CA initiative is worded in a way to say to conservatives states that CA is not going to fully stop you from doing what you want – we just want to be able to secure what we want – this will encourage conservative states to support CA – which will get news in conservative states to talk well about this CA initiative.

• This combined news coverage will mean a lot of news about this initiative is generated - all of that news coverage will make a lot of Californians excited and they will believe – this could happen. When Californians believe a big idea could actually happen, they come and support that idea.

 

What documents was this initiative modeled after?

 

• https://www.californiacan.info/initiative/

• https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdf...?

• http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVer...

• http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions/2017/Bills...

• https://legiscan.com/AZ/text/HB2226/id/1588348

 

What are the American states that have called for a Constitutional Convention?

The number of States calling for a Con Con is the highest it has been in decades. 

 

• "Thirty-four, that's the magic number. And by some counts, the country is surprisingly close." (NPR, 3/31/17)

• "It takes 34 states to trigger a convention for constitutional amendments... Twenty-eight state legislatures already have approved measures calling for a convention to propose a federal balanced budget requirement." (ApNews 12/16)

• "28 of the 34 states required to call a constitutional convention already have passed such resolutions." (The Hill, 1/8/16)

 

Since 1990 to current year:

 

1. Alabama

2. Alaska

3. Arizona

4. California

5. Colorado

6. Florida

7. Georgia

8. Illinois

9. Indiana

10. Louisiana

11. Michigan

12. Missouri

13. Nebraska

14. Nevada

15. New Hampshire

16. New Jersey

17. North Dakota

18. Ohio

19. Oklahoma

20. Rhode Island

21. South Dakota

22. Tennessee

23. Utah

24. Vermont

25. West Virginia

26. Wyoming

27. Texas

 

Close calls:

 

1. Delaware filed a resolution for a Con Con after 1990, but rescinded their application in 2016.

2. Kansas almost passed a resolution calling for a Con Con in 2016.

3. Arkansas almost passed a resolution calling for a Con Con in 2017.

4. Iowa almost passed a resolution calling for a Con Con in 2017.

5. Kentucky is considering a resolution, currently.

 

How many more American states need to call for a Con Con for it to actually occur?

 

• 7 American states, plus the 27 that have submitted paperwork to enact a Con Con would equal the 34 America states needed to call for a Con Con.

 

What are the main things other American states have demanded at a Con Con?

 

• Fiscally restrained spending by Federal government.

• That the Federal government have to pass a balanced budget.

• Repeal Corporate personhood.

 

Has California called for a Con Con before?

 

• California has called for a Con Con many times before in the last century - to deal with a variety of issues:

  • Demanding the direct election of senators 1911

  • Demanding the ability to tax government securities 1935

  • Demanding modified labor laws 1935

  • Asking for America to create a world government 1949

  • Demanding the ability to tax vehicles to pay for highways 1952

  • Demanding that corporations are not legally described as people 2014

 

What is the difference between the California attempt to call for a Con Con in 2014, and this version?

 

• The California bill to call for a Constitutional Convention previously was limited to only looking at overturning the American Court ruling that corporations are people. This attempt includes that language and asks for more things to be defined at the convention.

 

Why does it matter that CA be involved in this Con Con?

 

• Professor of politics describes Con Con as 'whoever is able to put together a real force going to the Convention, can wield control. “Nancy MacLean, a professor of history and public policy at Duke University, said the most organized or best-funded delegations might be able to steer a convention.” (News & Observer, June 2017)

 

Is a Constitutional Convention likely to turn into a ‘runaway” event, where the convention passes laws that no one who called for a Con Con ever thought of?

 

• Extremely unlikely - consider this commentary from Forbes magazine, 2016 and others:

  • “This is a reasonable fear, but here’s why there is no cause for worry: Consider where the logic leads from the correct “long-shot” description of the Convention of States. If 34 state legislatures actually were to formally agree on a Convention call, it would be the first time in history. When we reflect on the magnitude of such an accomplishment—all the coalitions formed in each state and across the country, the massive increase in public awareness of the crisis that would result, and the effect of all this on public opinion and voting behavior—we see that the well-intentioned concerns of those fearing a runaway convention miss the mark. They miss the effect on the U.S. Congress, the Executive Branch, and the U.S. Supreme Court of such an unprecedented popular movement. Faced with an historic uprising by We The People, unscrupulous delegates and/or Congress would be unable to pull strings from behind closed doors without exciting a national uproar.” (Forbes, 2016)

  • “You may have heard alarms that if we hold a national convention for proposing constitutional amendments the gathering would be an uncontrollable constitutional convention (“con-con”) that could propose anything at all... The claim is called the “runaway scenario.” It has almost no basis in history or law... Biggerstaff concludes that this was why the runaway convention fiction suddenly emerged from nowhere during the 1960s. In his view, “generating unwarranted fear of the Article V convention process was a ploy introduced by progressives as a way to prevent states from countering progressives’ use of judicial activism.” (The Hill 5/2017)

  • “After consulting with the top experts, we’ve concluded that the arguments for runaway convention are without merit and not supported by the evidence.Exhibit A in this discussion is America’s very long and documented history of conventions. In the hundreds of state and interstate conventions that have taken place here in the founding era and beyond, none have ever run away. On rare occasions, a delegate would suggest departing from the agenda, but that person would get nowhere because checks and balances were built-in, as they are here.A common internet meme calling the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 a runaway is based on poor scholarship. The false narrative goes like this: Convention delegates only had the authority to amend the Articles of Confederation (America’s first Constitution), but ignored that and threw the Articles on the scrap heap. Hence, it’s said they jumped over their boundaries and ran outside the law.In reality, 10 of the 12 state delegations at that convention had broad authority which included the ability to adopt a new Constitution. This was made explicit by the instructions their states gave them.”  (US Term Limits)

  • “Those speculations simply overlook the last two decades of research into the background and subsequent history of the Constitution's amendment process. They also ignore how that process actually has worked, and how the courts elucidate it.” (American Thinker, 2013)

 

What are the risks of a Constitutional Convention? If Cal Con Con is asking progressive California to work with conservative states - who propose to modify the Constitution in ways that oppose our values - why encourage that? Wouldn't that make their goals more attainable? Isn't there a conflict of interests here?

 

• Firstly, we need to move forward, somehow. Progressive CA citizens are being politically attacked, on a regular basis, by the Alt Right, and we need to put some things to bed, so we can live our lives - wouldn’t you like that?

• Every proposal requires compromise and negotiation. We can’t expect to meet all our needs, without meeting some of theirs. It’s only reasonable. So we must focus on what matters to us, and get ready to fight for it. We want to make the Constitution a stronger protector of Human Values, of people values. How we each define American values does differ (red to blue), but when it comes down to it, we need to create a system in which we will have a strong defense (and strong defenders) of what matters to us once negotiations begin, and we must be prepared for that moment, the moment when this Convention begins. If it’s going to happen - which we believe it is - we must be ready.

• So yes, there are some predictable risks. The main one being that some things may get voted on and ratified that we, in CA, don’t like. However, just like now, both politically and legally, all proposed amendments and bills will need to be ratified and, if they are, they will always be open to interpretation, attack, and defense within the USA political system. That doesn’t change.

• CA is standing up for its values by imposing a travel ban to certain states that do not protect or support LGBTQ rights. We know how to fight for what we believe in. Now we need to do that at the highest levels of our democracy, at the Constitutional Convention.

 

How will you stop USA turning even more conservative?

 

• We will align with other progressive states, in order to raise the progressive voice in a convention that will have a majority of conservative voices. Standing together with shared value states is key to winning our positions, as is being prepared.

• And, remember, one of our key proposals is putting in 'steps to secession' for all states. That means, if USA continues to go more right of Conservative, we can choose Independence. We have various issues we are seeking to protect, in perpetuity, the most important being our right to peace, freedom and a healthy environment.

• Without us being aggressively involved in this Convention, the America that emerges as a result, will be one that CA’s cannot live in. Which is why Cal Con Con is planning to both moderate what red states ask for at the Constitutional Convention and, simultaneously, create a reasonable path to leave America.

• Con Con has liberals and conservatives already working together, so the theory that CA could work with Conservative States is strong. 

  • "Some liberals and conservatives are teaming up in an effort to rewrite the Constitution. The campaign for conventions, however one comes about, is not solely led by a conservative bastion. Former Democratic presidential candidate Lawrence Lessig stands out as a major leader in the movement." (Slate, 2016)

  • "Conventioneers could employ the age-old practice of logrolling to get their way — combining a conservative proposal (such as the balanced budget mandate) with a liberal one (such as gun control) into a single amendment — no matter how bad or messy the resulting law.Seven of our existing 27 amendments contain at least two quite different provisions." (LA Times, 3/2017)

  • "But the idea is gaining steam now, stoked by groups on the left and right that say amendments drafted and ratified by states are the last, best hope for fixing the nation’s broken political system and dysfunctional — some even say tyrannical — federal government." (Pew Trusts, 8/2017)

 

Given a) That it takes 2/3 of the American states to pass (ratify) proposals in a Constitutional Convention, and b) That there are much fewer liberal states than conservative... won’t red states just vote ‘no’ on anything that Californian and other progressive American states want? Does it matter if California attends the Con Con if it can’t get anything that it wants?

 

• California will have to convince 2/3 of American states to support ideas that California is planning on fighting for. However, remember that the phrase has been around for decades and continues to be referenced in political news – “As California goes, so goes America”. California has been leading America for decades (and not just financially), so why is it not reasonable to assume that it can provide leadership in a Con Con – when it has led Red states for decades? For example:

 

• In America, 13 American states follow California’s car standards rather than America’s.(1)

• Recently, California lead cities in red states - including Louisiana and Indiana - along with entire American states (e.g. New York & Washington) on Climate Change regulation.(2)

• Car pollution and Climate Regulation are progressive issues and California has already lead Americans in American red states to support this regulation.  

• Successful legislation for legalizing recreational Marijuana.(3)

 

• Therefore while it will be tough – we believe in the ability of California to do what it has already proven it can – lead American states to a more progressive, sustainable and financially cash-positive, path.

• Secondly, this criticism also forgets that California does not always ask for things that the red states of America hate. America’s red states have always been soft on the idea of state’s rights and autonomy, in general; i.e. states being able to choose their own policies instead of the Federal government imposing them, plus, on the right of a state to secede from America (e.g. South Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, Alabama). California is also going to ask for these things. The plan for Cal Con Con has been to push for progressive values, to push back against regressive things and if all of that doesn’t work to get more ability for CA to be autonomous and if needed to get a path for secession – so that it can leave an America that has been made into a legally condoned monstrosity.

• Finally, red states will not fight CA on asking for states to have more ability to ignore Federal policy and design their own laws - as per their own tradition - nor will they fight allowing a state to secede – and these are all things that CA is aiming to get from the Con Con, and which provide for CA to insulate its own government, people & ecology, from whatever America turns into on the other side of the impending Con Con.

 

(1) http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1109217_which-states-follow-californias-emission-and-zero-emission-vehicle-rules

(2) https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/20

(3) http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/11/becerra-california-marijuana-238246

 

Why is having secession steps in Constitution reasonable and legal?

 

• Now is the obvious time to put into the Constitution the steps to secession for any and all States. Think about it, there is no contemporary agreement that anyone goes into, be it personal or professional, that does not have an exit strategy. None. If it does not, it is more commonly referred to as slavery, kidnapping or 'being held against your will' - and there are USA laws against this! You would not take a job if you didn’t know you could leave at some point (or how you would leave it), nobody in today's culture would enter a marriage or even get on an airplane without knowing how we can get out of it! These types of agreements are part of a modern democracy, or should be by now. This truth needs to be incorporated into a new version of the Constitution, with clear and reasonable steps to secession.

  • Our entire legal system and socio-political infrastructure is founded on this understanding of 'freedom to enter, leave and reform'.

  • Examples of such agreements are marriage/divorce, hiring/firing, legal protection from harassment at work, in marriage, or on the street.

  • Even buildings have an exit path built into their city coding ordinances. No entry - in contemporary and developed democratic society - is legally demanded without also having a legal pathway to leaving, should you need to for your safety, your well-being, or to protect your rights. The countries that do not protect those rights actually have USA or UN trade sanctions against them. So why is it ok here, in our own USA, to promote 'indentured slavery'?

• The Constitution, as a document, is absolutely lacking for the absence of such steps. Without them, the binding document is not sustainable, not democratic and not a defensibly freely-entered, agreement.

• These steps - documented - will sit in the background for future use, should any State require them, at some point. The option to secede may never get used by anybody, but the right to is what we are defending.

• Having these steps to Independence protect and strengthen a State's voice in any and all negotiations. 

 

Why do you call it slavery?

 

• Because slavery is the opposite of free-will choice. CA did not historically choose to be part of USA by truy democratic and representational free-will choice, and if it doesn’t have the right to peacefully and legally leave, then it is not a democratic agreement.

• And, to add to that, we are losing more wealth than we are keeping, by being a 'donor state' to the rest of USA - much of which holds and promotes views of democracy that do not align with our more typically progressive values.

 

Is the idea of supporting secession democratic?

 

• Yes! It is not as relevant for you to personally believe in secession. It is more relevant that, if you believe in democracy, you are willing to help create a working platform that is democratic at its core and in its function, to reflect that belief with, and on behalf of, your extended community. That’s why it needs to be ratified within the Constitution - the backbone agreement between all parties of United States. If we are not here by an initial choice and have no way out, then what is the nature of our relationship? Is that democratic?

• Considering that, putting secession back into this founding father’s agreement isn’t remotely radical; it’s simply fair, reasonable… and time!

 

But didn’t CA agree to join the Union at some point?

 

• Actually, not freely, no. CA was forced to join at gunpoint, with a false election (in which local indigenous peoples were not allowed to vote - sound familiar??). CA was politically ‘strong-armed’, by force, by USA, back in 1850. 

 

Is this Initiative a desire to go against Federal Law?

 

• "The bill is based on a similar bill which would declare California a “sanctuary state” for undocumented immigrants. Either one would be the first of its kind on a statewide level. If enacted, the bill would be a new battle in the ongoing centuries-long American power struggle between states and the federal government... Nullification does not stand up in federal court. If you’re arrested and a federal case is brought against you, it does not matter what state law says. You can still be given a long prison sentence for taking part in an activity that is fully legal under your state’s laws." (Huffington Post, 2017)

• Poll: California rallies around Jerry Brown, eager to battle Trump, "Sixty-five percent of California adults say the state and local governments should pursue their own policies to protect the rights of undocumented immigrants, while 63 percent of adults support state action to address global warming, according to the poll."  David Siders (Politico 02/10/17)

• "1/3 of CA approve of Trumps' performance." (PPIC 2/2017)

• Sanctuary State bill passes CA Senate. (SacBee 4/2017)

 

What if I’m uncomfortable with the possible outcomes? Can I still support Cal Con Con?

 

• Yes. It's a Gamble and it's a risk. But look at the times we are in; California values are under attack and with a conservative Supreme Court and an extreme conservative party willing to support and promote racist, homophobic and misogynistic policies; now is the time for Extreme Measures. Here at Cal Con Con, we call it time for Reasonable Radical Reform! At this point, the real question is, can you afford not to support this last line of defense?

 

Do we absolutely have to have a convention?

 

• Yes, we absolutely believe we do. It is time to call America OUT!

• In Jan 2017, according to Reuters/Ipsos poll, 47.5% of Californians were willing to discuss secession - almost half our population. We are speaking for many when trying to represent our shared values.

• America is too big to manage the rich diversity of its unique CA citizens skillfully, without the implementation of hard and fast rules into the Constitution, that represent and protect our humanitarian and environmental needs.

• If there was a way to make the Constitutional Convention not happen, then we would be working for that. But many have looked at this, and at the evidence presented on our Cal Con Con FB page and come to the same conclusion: that this is going to happen - with or without California’s preparation. We need to dominate, rather than be caught by surprise.

• The Cal con-con team philosophy is that, rather than sticking our head in the sand and hoping that red states aren’t able to rewrite the Constitution of America without a reasoning hand, we ensure that California is fully present in this conversation; leading an alliance of those progressive States such as Oregon, Washington, Vermont and New Mexico. Together we can push back on any drastic amendments the Red States want to make, shaping the American Constitution in their image, making legal allowance for their prejudices. We can moderate those threats and influences. And, if we do not achieve satisfactory results, then we will be in a position to create a path for California to leave America, because the America that will exist after the Red States are able to shape the Constitution - unfettered - will be one that most Californians cannot safely, or peacefully, live in.

 

Who wrote this initiative?

 

• It was jointly written by people of different working backgrounds: Democratic party officials of California, Artists, a Teacher of Social Innovative Change, California Government Contractors, and many Calexit supporters... including Calexit co-founder; Marcus Ruiz Evans.

 

Thinking of the future.

 

• CA is the innovation capital of USA. And we are needed now, more than ever, for our ability to problem solve creatively. Energy divided is energy halved. We need to be able to focus on our innovation skills, to meet the problems that are coming to meet us and our brothers and sisters around the world. CA can help improve the qualities of people’s lives here, and abroad. We need to be able to focus on health and well-being, on growing our economy and on sharing our wealth; be it in ideas, support, consulting or assisting. And our innovations are not just technical, they are also social. Technology is advancing fast, taking over our lifestyles and jobs, affecting what we think of as ‘normal’. We need to not only keep up, but stay ahead of this curve of the future. We need to create new and harmonious social systems to meet these new times, and usher in the new. We cannot thrive the way we need to with all this primal ideological tension - others need us to be able to help them, those who rely on us for support - right now our attention is busy protecting and defending what we have instead of growing more of what we want… our amazing future is waiting for us.

 

A final word, for now.

 

We raised the cash so quickly on this campaign (within days) because others, like you, are concerned for our CA future, our children’s future, and our Planet’s future. We see and feel the need to act. We cannot sit by and do nothing - it is not in our blood. We are Californians and we believe in justice, freedom and liberty. If you want to see this convention succeed with our shared values, then keep supporting this campaign, keep giving, to support the presence of intelligent, considered and diligent people who are working for you, every day, to make this happen.

 

Thank you. And keep spreading the word.

 

The Cal Con Con Initiative Team,

Clare, Marcus, Joyce, Sue, Joh, Farid & Charles.