A Look at Constitutional Relevancy

Well the New York State Senate decided to take the day off again today while I went to work, and the money I earned will still be taxed to pay their salaries. One of life's sweet little ironies, I suppose. I wish I had a job where I could just not show up and still get paid, don't you?

So this evening I figured I would waste some time by reading the state constitution. I say wasting time because the state constitution apparently has nothing to say about the present lack of anything productive being done in Albany. So --just for fun, as it has no bearing on the present crisis --here is one of the sections on constitutional amendments:

Any amendment or amendments to this constitution may be proposed in the senate and assembly whereupon such amendment or amendments shall be referred to the attorney-general whose duty it shall be within twenty days thereafter to render an opinion in writing to the senate and assembly as to the effect of such amendment or amendments upon other provisions of the constitution. Upon receiving such opinion, if the amendment or amendments as proposed or as amended shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be entered on their journals, and the ayes and noes taken thereon, and referred to the next regular legislative session convening after the succeeding general election of members of the assembly, and shall be published for three months previous to the time of making such choice; and if in such legislative session, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each house, then it shall be the duty of the legislature to submit each proposed amendment or amendments to the people for approval in such manner and at such times as the legislature shall prescribe; and if the people shall approve and ratify such amendment or amendments by a majority of the electors voting thereon, such amendment or amendments shall become a part of the constitution on the first day of January next after such approval. Neither the failure of the attorney-general to render an opinion concerning such a proposed amendment nor his or her failure to do so timely shall affect the validity of such proposed amendment or legislative action thereon.

So let's say you are a citizen and you have a good idea for amending the constitution, first you have to find a legislator to put the bill in, then the Attorney General needs to offer an opinion on the bill, then it has to be voted on by . . . yes, the legislators, not once but twice, in two consecutive sessions . . . and then it gets put to a vote by the people, and then if the measure is approved it takes effect the first day of "January next." When you add this all up it's at least two years, more likely more, and you might have better luck betting on Michael Jordan's famous shot to keep his Big Mac away from Larry Bird: "over the second rafter, off the floor, nothing but net."

Clearly there is a need to protect the foundational documents of state government from arbitrary change. At the same time, a document that is so diffcult to change and is protected by such onerous ballot access laws risk becoming ossified at first, and later irrelevant. And when control of government is taken out of the hands of the people, that is the death of democracy.

Did I mention that currently our state legislature is utterly non-functional, and that the state constitution has nothing to say about it? Is our constitution merely ossified, or has it already become irrelevant?