Rhode Island Constitutional Convention President Kevin A. McKenna presides over a session of the 1968 convention in the House of Representatives chamber at the State House. (Rhode Island State Archives)
The well-funded coalition of labor and civil liberties groups opposing the calling of a Rhode Island constitutional convention is using the history of Rhode Island’s 1986 convention to make its case. In doing so, the Rhode Island Citizens for Responsible Government has committed the fallacies of composition and presentism .
The fallacy of composition is to mistake the part for the whole. For example, if constitutional democracy has flaws as a system of government, that doesn’t prove that it is worse than all other systems of government, such as autocracy. Similarly, if Rhode Island’s convention process is flawed, that doesn’t prove it doesn’t serve a vital democratic function.
To be sure, Rhode Island’s 1986 convention was deeply flawed. The legislature and its special interest allies were successful in attaining too much influence over the convention. This included the House speaker’s son and daughter elected as convention delegates, an ally of the speaker elected convention president, and the legislature’s improper micromanagement of the convention’s budget and staff. One consequence was the convention proposing one of the speaker’s pet projects: a ban on abortion. In 2014, the last time the convention referendum was on the ballot, this “No” coalition so hyped this anti-abortion proposal that many Rhode Islanders thought it was the 1986 convention’s primary work product rather than merely one of 33 proposals it approved. (The abortion proposal also only squeaked by the convention — approved with the smallest majority, 54.2%, as opposed to an average majority of 86.5%.)