Martin DyckmanThe last time the Constitution Revision Commission met, in 1997, it had some very good ideas.
One of them was to establish an independent panel to redistrict the Legislature and congressional districts.
More than half the members favored it, but fierce pressure from John Thrasher and other Republican bosses in the Legislature peeled off an indispensable supporter and it failed on reconsideration for lack of a 60 percent supermajority.
There was better luck for another measure aimed at reinforcing the people’s right to vote. It provided for an open primary when only one party has candidates — something that happens much too often — “and the winner will have no opposition in the general election.”
This went on the 1998 ballot and the voters approved it.
But before the next election, a dubious ruling from the office of the secretary of state, Katherine Harris, held that the entry of a write-in candidate would close the primary.
That was a case of parsing the words rather than the intent of the commission’s amendment.
Write-in candidates never matter in Florida. Harris and her people knew that. (In the last legislative election, for example, only one write-in got as much as 1 percent of the vote. There were four “candidates” who didn’t get even one vote.)
But Harris and her staff also knew that neither major party is fond of open primaries.
It happens in every election cycle that “candidates” utterly unknown to the public beforehand or afterward come from somewhere to file as write-ins.
Who knows why? Ego, perhaps? An illogical sense of messianic purpose? Maybe.
But it’s a safe bet that at least some of them are put up to it by Republican or Democratic candidates who want a more familiar playing field than one open to all voters.
Nine legislative candidates, five Republicans and four Democrats, are on the Nov. 4 ballot this year only because they have write-in opponents. They are as good as elected. Their primaries should have been open.
For that and other reasons, chiefly gerrymandering, nearly half the voters will be essentially powerless to influence their Legislature on Nov. 4. There are far too many uncompetitive districts and unopposed incumbents.
To remedy this ought to be a high priority of the next Constitution Revision Commission, which will be convened in 2017. There are many ways — open primaries being only one — in which the right to vote could be brought back to life in Florida.
The partisanship of Harris, the last elected secretary, and the abuses of discretion under Gov. Rick Scott’s appointed secretary make a case for creating an independent, bipartisan commission to oversee elections.
But as I have written before, the revision commission needs open-minded people.
Of the 37 members, 18 will be appointed by the legislative leaders. Another 15, including the chair, will be the governor’s choice. The attorney general is a member automatically. Three people appointed by the Supreme Court complete the roster.
A commission composed almost entirely of only one party’s appointees might as well stay home for all the good it could possibly do. That would be true whichever party was in control.
Because the Republicans are guaranteed to keep the Legislature, any prospects for a balanced commission depend upon electing Charlie Crist governor and George Sheldon attorney general.
There are many other significant issues awaiting its attention. They have been the subjects of earlier columns in this series.
— Restoring the independence of the judicial nominating commissions, which have been debased into patronage committees.
— Extending term limits or replacing them with recall elections.
— Liberating the Public Service Commission from the control of a Legislature owned by the power companies.
— Providing for laws, not just constitutional amendments, to be adopted by initiative campaigns.
To that list I would add regularized restoration of civil rights for people who have paid their debts to society, power to the ethics commission to act on obvious violations without having to wait for a sworn complaint, and a requirement of proportionate party membership on legislative committees.
Considering what vast good — or, perish the thought, harm — that a Constitution Revision Commission can do, it is more than mildly disappointing that neither gubernatorial candidate is speaking about that opportunity.
The past, after all, is only prologue. This election should be about the future, not the past.
Martin Dyckman is a retired associate editor of the St. Petersburg Times. He discloses that he contributed modestly to George Sheldon’s campaign. He lives near Waynesville, North Carolina. Column courtesy of Context Florida.
