Is he right about the ‘wrong fix’?

Re: “The wrong fix for California,” Opinion, May 28

I agree with Erwin Chemerinsky that a constitutional convention is “the wrong fix for California.” But, with all due respect for law school dean Chemerinsky, so is his proposal to put to a vote the two-thirds vote requirement for passage of the state budget and of new taxes.

I know that Chemerinsky is a brilliant legal mind, and dedicated to the public good, but he should not try to solve economic problems. Raising taxes is contrary to the economic stimulus needed to get our economy back into gear.

The solution is twofold: reduce waste in government programs so that the same services can be provided more efficiently, perhaps even augmented; and develop additional sources for revenues to the government, perhaps by providing services and products that citizens will be willing to pay for.

George Epstein

Los Angeles

::

Chemerinsky is right about a constitutional convention. The process would be slow, probably ineffectual and possibly dangerous.

But Chemerinsky is wrong about repealing the requirement that two-thirds of the Legislature approve budgets and tax increases.

Why would he and other liberals want that? Obviously, to make it easier to raise taxes on already overtaxed Californians.

George W. Carlyle

Newport Beach

::

I agree totally with Chemerinsky that a constitutional convention to revise or totally redraft the state Constitution would be difficult, time-consuming and perhaps unfruitful. As we know, “every journey begins with the first step,” so when do we begin?

Doubt is an essential part of every worthwhile decision, so let us doubt, but let us act -- now

Robert E. Tumelty

Seal Beach

::

I disagree with Chemerinsky that full revision of the California Constitution is too ambitious. He concedes that reform is needed, and there are many incentives to rescue the state from its dysfunctional condition now.

Most difficulties that he foresees are conflicting special interests, each seeking constitutional favor for an outcome dear to it. However, that assumes that the process is to be left to everyday politicians. No, what we need is a blue-ribbon commission to develop a framework for the principled conduct of public business to promote the best long-term common good, free of provisions attempting to predetermine which special interests will prevail, the public interest be damned.

California suffers from the constitutionalization of far too many issues, often at the ballot box under the influence of grossly misleading and/or inadequate sound bites, pro and con. The time is ripe for a full revision of the Constitution to correct that.

John C. Nangle

Palm Springs