Opinion: RI ballot Question 1 could open door that should stay closed

Mary-Murphy Walsh writes for the Rhode Island Current that a constitutional convention could invite powerful special interests into the state to pursue their own agenda.

“You can pry this wedding ring from my cold, dead, gay hands.” That was Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s defiant message to Donald Trump at the Democratic National Convention, confronting his threats to LGBTQ+ rights. 

Democrats in Rhode Island might believe our state constitution shields us from such assaults on our freedoms. However, Question 1 on the Nov. 5 ballot could pose a threat to those rights.

Question 1 asks whether Rhode Island should hold a constitutional convention — a gathering of 75 elected delegates empowered to propose amendments to our state constitution. While this might initially seem like an opportunity for positive change, it is fraught with peril. 

History warns us of the dangers. In the 1986 constitutional convention, amendments were proposed to restrict a woman’s right to choose and to disenfranchise voters, leading to a ballot measure that was at the end of a long list of questions in that year’s November election in the hope that many voters would ignore it. Thankfully, voters overwhelmingly defeated the question.

But pro-life advocates weren’t satisfied with stopping there; their goal was — and continues to be — to erode the rights of women, workers, immigrants, LGBTQ+ individuals, and people of color. 

Question 14 approved by delegates at the 1986 Rhode Island Constitutional Convention appears in the 1986 ‘Voters’ Guide to Fourteen Ballot Questions for Constitutional Revision.’

Between 1986 and 2014, there were 13 attempts to ban same-sex marriage in our state, according to the ACLU of Rhode Island. It wasn’t until 2013 that marriage equality was legalized in Rhode Island. In 2014, the question of a constitutional convention appeared on the ballot again. Many, like myself, were unaware of its significance. Now, as a gay woman with my right to marry under threat from leaders who oppose equality, I’m reminded of how critical this decision is.

Our state’s constitution currently safeguards reproductive rights and workers’ rights to organize, demand fair wages, and ensure safe working conditions. These rights are the result of decades of struggle and activism. Conservative groups, some aligned with Trump’s ideology, aim to reverse this progress, and a convention would give them the perfect opportunity.

Proponents argue that a convention could bring positive changes, like implementing ethics reforms or increasing the minimum wage. However, powerful special interests are more likely to dominate the agenda. It’s telling that the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity, an organization opposed to workers’ rights to unionize, supports Question 1. Their agenda is to dismantle protections that empower working families, disproportionately affecting people of color who are often at the forefront of labor movements.

Moreover, there’s no cap on how much out-of-state special interests can spend to influence the convention. With delegates not subject to recall or oversight, these deep-pocketed groups could heavily sway the process without fear of repercussions. 

Proponents argue that a convention could bring positive changes, like implementing ethics reforms or increasing the minimum wage. However, powerful special interests are more likely to dominate the agenda.

With Rhode Island being the only state this year with such a question on the ballot, we could become a prime target for groups eager to impose radical agendas. We could become a testing ground for initiatives that undermine public education, workers’ rights, and social services that many Rhode Islanders rely on.

The rights of women to make decisions about their own bodies, the ability of immigrants to live without fear, the fight against systemic racism, and protections for workers — could be imperiled by the prospect of a constitutional convention. These conservative groups aim to unravel progress for all marginalized communities, threatening the very fabric of our inclusive society.

The allure of a constitutional convention is a dangerous mirage. The supposed benefits are outweighed by significant risks that could have lasting negative impacts on our state.

Mary-Murphy Walsh is a lead elected union organizer for SEIU 1199 New England, organizing health care workers. She also serves as the president of the Young Democrats of Rhode Island, a Democratic Party-affiliated group organizing high school and college-aged people to become more civically engaged. Her commentaries represent her own views and are not submitted through her role with the Young Democrats.