Today there was a good post by Eric Goranson at Caffeinated Thoughts blog, dealing with (among other things) the constitutional convention ballot question. Here it is an excerpt:
The following question is on the back of your ballot: “Shall there be a convention to revise the constitution, and propose amendment or amendments to same?”
My vote will be a resounding YES! The Legislature has failed to act, I can’t see Republicans (sadly, at this point anyway) having the spinal fortitude to get two Assemblies to vote for a marriage amendment should they win control, and this is a Constitutional remedy we should jump on.
The opposition from the Right and the Left will point out that all kinds of bad things can happen in a convention and then the people might vote on them. The simple truth is this: All proposed amendments would be voted on individually. With that in mind, the opposition always wants the people to vote when the polling shows that the people agree with them and avoid popular votes when the polling tells them they might lose. Anyone who opposes the Constitutional Convention is either disingenuous, saying that calling a convention is “playing fast and loose with the Constitution” (It’s a CONSTITUTIONAL REMEDY, numbskull!) or they use fear to scare people into making a “risky” convention take place. They have succumbed to elitism. We either trust the people with the vote or we don’t.
With polls showing the people of Iowa pretty evenly split on the gay marriage issue, a marriage amendment wouldn’t be a slam dunk for either side. But a convention could also allow many other important reforms that the legislature won’t move on, such as term limits, sunshine laws, and recall of elected officials to at least be voted on by the people. You can read Goranson’s entire post here.