Legislators should not take Constitution lightly

Although the state Legislature’s 60-day session doesn’t begin for another seven weeks, some legislators are already talking about trying to amend the state Constitution — not because of some glaring deficiency in the venerable document, but to circumvent the legislative process, as well as Gov. Susana Martinez’s ability to veto their pet pieces of proposed legislation.

That’s not only an abuse of the process, it can help to exacerbate the bitter partisanship that fuels legislative gridlock.

There are proper times and reasons to amend the state Constitution, such as the amendment to revamp the jail bond system that voters just overwhelmingly approved. Eighty-seven percent of the voters who cast a ballot on the amendment apparently agreed that the justice system was allowing too many violent criminals to bail out of jail and create more mayhem, and sought to put a stop to it.

But now there’s already talk about submitting constitutional amendments to voters on issues ranging from raising the state’s minimum wage to legalizing recreational marijuana use to creating an ethics commission — all measures that bogged down in the previous legislative sessions without ever reaching the governor’s desk.

Albuquerque Republican Rep. Jim Dines’ limited bill to amend the state Constitution to create a nine-member ethics commission that would oversee the legislative and executive branches, contractors and lobbyists is a legitimate proposal and an example of the type of issue that would make sense as part of the state’s document of fundamental principles of government.

But regardless of their popularity, neither the ever-changing minimum amount of pay a business is required to provide nor a decision to ignore federal law so that people in the state can get high with less worry about being arrested rise to the level of constitutional concern. They are issues of the day that can be addressed through legislation, if the support is there for passage.

But that isn’t easy. While polls have shown both the wage and drug measures to be popular among New Mexicans, legislators have been unable, or unwilling, to get either into law. And while that may show a disconnect between the legislators and the people who put them in office, it’s not an excuse to tinker with the state Constitution. Besides, this session, with both the Senate and House back under Democratic Party control, more bills of this type have a better chance of making it to the governor’s desk.

But fear that a bill, even a bipartisan one that has deep public support, will fall victim to a governor’s veto pen is no reason to stop seeking compromise legislation.

There have been 171 amendments to the state Constitution since it was adopted in 1911, but the bulk of them deal with fixes in taxation and revenue, education, government operations and the expansion of civil rights. The U.S. Constitution has been amended only 27 times since its inception in 1789.

The clear message here is that amending the Constitution should not be considered a go-to option to bypass the administrative branch of government, which has veto power over the legislative branch, on routine issues. And that especially would apply to those issues that can be categorized as the populist flavors of the day.

Passing bills is a difficult process, but it has been designed that way to help maintain consistency in law and encourage best practices. The Constitution was never intended to be a document subject to whims and it should not be made into one by impatient legislators.