JOINT RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR A BI-PARTISAN PREPARATORY COMMISSION TO ASSEMBLE INFORMATION ON CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS IN PREPARATION FOR A VOTE BY THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS ON THE HOLDING OF A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE XIV SECTION 2 OF THE RHODE ISLAND CONSTITUTION (This resolution would provide for a twelve (12) member bi-partisan commission to assemble information on constitutional questions in preparation for a vote by electors on holding a constitutional convention, and who would report back by September 1, 2024.)
If passed, this bill would serve a pivotal role in enhancing civic engagement and informing voters on critical constitutional matters. The formation of this commission allows for a structured investigation into potential amendments or revisions to the constitution, thereby facilitating a more educated electorate. The members will include appointments from the leadership of both the House and Senate, ensuring diverse political representation. However, the absence of stipulations for the compensation of members raises concerns about the potential limitations in attracting individuals with the necessary expertise or dedication to undertake this significant task.
House Bill H8324 proposes the establishment of a bi-partisan preparatory commission charged with assembling information on constitutional questions ahead of a vote by qualified electors regarding the convening of a constitutional convention. This initiative is mandated under Article XIV Section 2 of the Rhode Island Constitution, which requires that the question of whether to hold a convention be posed to the electorate during the general election scheduled for November 5, 2024. The commission is to consist of twelve members, encompassing both elected representatives and members of the public, who will report their findings by September 1, 2024.
While the bill is largely seen as a procedural step towards empowering citizens to influence constitutional matters, its passage could ignite debates about the specific constitutional amendments that might be proposed. Proponents assert that this initiative will foster transparency and public trust in governmental processes. Conversely, skeptics worry about the potential for the political motivations of commission members to shape the outcomes of the deliberations, influencing the nature and direction of proposed changes to the constitution.