It was round two of the televised Constitutional Convention debates last night, with two lawmakers, the state attorney general and a constitutional expert battling it out over the merits and downsides of convening an elected assembly to review the state's governing document.

The live, hourlong debate, designed to raise awareness of the Constitutional Convention ballot question Hawai'i voters will encounter on election day at times grew tense as the supporters and opponents of the so-called ConCon disagreed over what a convention would accomplish and what issues it would address.

"We can do better," said state Attorney General Mark Bennett, a proponent of holding a Constitutional Convention. "In what ways? We can take the Constitution back for victims of crime. We can mandate healthcare reform so that we can keep our doctors in Hawai'i. We can improve the educational system with local school boards or some other equivalent method. We can set term limits for legislators and judges. We need new ideas."

Anne Feder Lee, former president of the League of Women Voters of Hawai'i, who has written a book on the state Constitution, countered that supporters of the Constitutional Convention have not been clear on what needs to be changed — or how much support there is for making those changes.

"A number of proponents also give us what I call rather soundbite reasons (for holding a Constitutional Convention)," Lee said. "We have to dig deeper than soundbites. We must expect the proponents to ... show there's real grassroots support for those changes."

The debate featured Lee and state Senate President Colleen Hanabusa squaring off against ConCon supporters Bennett and state Rep. Della Au Belatti. Sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Hawaii and the Hawaii Institute for Public Affairs, the debate began at 6:30 p.m. and was aired on KGMB9 and live-streamed on www.honoluluadvertiser.com.

The discussion was moderated by KGMB reporter Stacy Loe, and included questions from viewers and Advertiser columnist Jerry Burris. Debate members also were allowed to ask each other questions.

PUSHING VIEWPOINTS

At one point, the debate grew particularly charged after Belatti said opponents of the convention were being influenced by Mainland and special interests. Later, Bennett said convention opponents are using "fear-mongering" to sway residents against a ConCon.

"They are telling people you should fear this, you should fear that," Bennett said, referring to recent television ads on the issue. "Fear-mongering has no place in this debate," he added.

Hanabusa, however, said those fears have foundation, since significant changes could be made to the Constitution in a convention. She added that the ads are paid for with help from labor unions, which she said represent the opinions of their members.

And Lee pointed out that both political parties in the Islands have joined the debate.

The Hawai'i Republican Party supports holding a convention, saying the state Legislature is not prepared to address today's problems. The Democratic Party of Hawai'i has come out against the Constitutional Convention.

"There are party politics involved," she said.

Most viewer questions last night tried to get at specifics regarding what would be accomplished with a ConCon.

For example, Jose Bulatao Jr., of Kaua'i, asked whether the convention could give Native Hawaiians a bigger voice in how ceded lands are overseen and their revenues distributed. The answer from panelists — yes — came with qualifications. Supporters of the convention said improvements could be made, while opponents said past advancements could be eroded.

The debate, which continued online for 30 minutes after the televised portion wrapped up, came a day after KHON2 also aired a live debate on the issue. In that debate, Hanabusa and state Sen. Gary Hooser went up against ConCon supporters Lt. Gov. James "Duke" Aiona and former U.S. Rep. Ed Case.

Voters will be asked Nov. 4 to vote "yes" or "no" on whether to convene a Constitutional Convention.

Blank votes count as "no" votes.

LAST ONE 30 YEARS AGO

The previous Constitutional Convention in Hawai'i was held 30 years ago, and cost about $2 million. The 60-day convention had 102 delegates, and resulted in a host of significant changes and additions to the state Constitution, including the requirement that the governor submit a balanced budget, the adoption of the Hawaiian language as an official state language, and the creation of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Judicial Selection Commission.

The discussion over whether to hold a convention has largely been overshadowed by the presidential and mayoral elections, but some say it could be one of the most important decisions voters will make Nov. 4.

Supporters of holding a ConCon say one is long overdue.

Voters have the chance every 10 years to call for a convention.

"We are encouraged every year to visit our doctors for annual physical checkups to see if things are working properly," Belatti said.

"The ConCon is government's annual physical checkup. Would you go 30 years without a physical checkup? That's essentially what we've done. Should we expect better from government and ourselves?"

But opponents say there is no immediate need for a convention, pointing to the lack of a single issue or set of issues behind the call for considering changes to the state Constitution. And, opponents say, the gathering would be a waste of money at a time when the state is facing increased budget woes amid a downturning economy.

There are disagreements about how much a convention would cost. The Legislative Reference Bureau has estimated a convention could cost up to $41.7 million. A task force set up by Aiona estimated it would cost from $2 million to $11 million.

"We are facing one of the worst budget situations ... in recent history," Hanabusa said, responding to a question from Loe over whether the expected costs of the convention are worthwhile. "What is it going to actually accomplish? You have to look at the document. What is that you want changed?"