Write to the Point
Buried in the back of your voter’s pamphlet is a little discussed vote on Senate Joint Resolution 8200. The measure cleared both the state Senate and House with comfortable, bipartisan approvals.
What is SJR 8200? Its text is pretty simple – a proposed constitutional amendment to add the phrase “catastrophic incidents” to the specified times of emergency where the Legislature can take immediate actions to ensure the continuation of government and governmental operations in areas impacted by these incidents. That applies to statewide government as well as local government.
Right now, the constitution allows the Legislature to do this only in times of “enemy attack.” SJR 8200 would broaden this as stated above.
Both the arguments for and against are succinct, and I’ll let you read them because I want you to read your pamphlet. I wonder sometimes if people really do this.
My concern stems mainly from exposure. First, this issue hasn’t received much attention in the media up to this election, and that vetting is needed. Expansion of governmental powers should be a concern to everyone because, as history has shown, when you expand or relinquish power, it’s very hard to reverse what happened.
It may seem like a good idea to allow the Legislature to take specified actions should “catastrophic incidents” take place, but once those incidents have passed, when and how do those actions stop and control revert to its original ownership. Contrary to the statement of those against, the argument for does specify the criteria defining “catastrophic incidents,” but maybe needs to go further, and again, this needs to be publicly discussed.
Second, it’s not clear to me why this attempt at emergency preparedness needs to be done through a constitutional amendment. If the intent is to make sure state and local governments are better prepared to respond to and function in emergencies such as earthquakes, devastating wildfires and other disasters, wouldn’t it be just as effective to create legislation that not only does this, but pays for it too?
Constitutional amendments are pretty final, seldom repealed, and the granting of extreme power shouldn’t be taken so lightly. It needs to be done in the light of day, not surreptitiously in the dead of night at the back of the voters pamphlet.
I would urge a no vote on SJR 8200, not because it’s not necessarily a good idea, but because it should be more publicly decide if it’s the right approach to a good idea. Unfortunately, most voters will look at it and think, “Well yes, in times of emergency I want the government to do everything in its power to make sure we’re safe.”
The problem is, sacrificing our power as citizens for a bit of safety isn’t always a good thing.
John McCallum can be reached at jmac@cheneyfreepress.com.
Reader Comments(0)