I'm in a hybrid position.

I absolutely want to see the amendment be voted on by the legislature in its role as constitutional convention. I despise the game that's been played by the legislature in simply not scheduling for a vote amendments-by-petition that would get the necessary 25% but that the leadership doesn't like.

Bulger started this garbage back in the 1990s. He got sued and the SJC ultimately ruled that (a) the practice is unconstitutional, (b) the legislature is required to vote on amendments-by-petition, but (c) the SJC, which normally has no problems handing down edicts and fashioning all sorts of crazy remedies, refused to penalize the legislature for shirking its constitutionally-required duties. So even though the state constitution says an amendment-by-petition only needs 25% of the vote of two successive constitutional conventions to get on the ballot, the sleaziness of Bulger/Trav/etc. and the pathetic spinelessness of the SJC has negated that requirement and in its place impose an effective 50% threshold (since 50% is needed to overrule the chair and force a vote to be scheduled). Shameful.

However, all that said, I'm fine with the amendment failing to get 25%
of the vote and so never reaching the ballot.