Several proposed amendments to the 1901 Alabama Constitution are on the ballot, including Amendment 1 , which if passed would authorize for another 20 years the Forever Wild Land Trust, preserving and setting aside natural areas for recreational activities throughout the state.
But many of the proposed amendments are not so easy to understand. For instance, here’s what Amendment 2 from the ballot: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, to allow issuance by the State from time to time of general obligation bonds under the authority of Section 219.04 and Section 219.041 to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, so long as the aggregate principal amount of all such general obligation bonds at any time outstanding is not in excess of $750 million. This amendment would replace the maximum aggregate principal limitations currently contained in said Sections 219.04 and 219.041. The proposed amendment would also allow issuance by the State of general obligation refunding bonds under the authority of Sections 219.04 and 219.041 to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, subject to certain minimum savings thresholds and limitations of maximum average maturity. (Proposed by Act 2012-567).
Basically, Amendment 2 provides incentives to recruit business, said Dr. Larry Powell, a political communication expert in the University of Alabama at Birmingham’s Department of Communication Studies. “It’s one (amendment) that very few people are opposing right now,” he said.
Amendment 4 is designed “to repeal portions of Amendment 111, now appearing as Section 256 of the Official Recompilation of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, relating to separation of schools by race and to repeal Section 259, Amendment 90, and Amendment 109, relating to the poll tax. (Proposed by Act 2011-353).” This much-discussed Amendment would remove racially exclusionary concepts from a portion of the constitution, Powell said. “The argument for removing it is that as long as we have racist elements in our constitution, that hurts Alabama’s image and our ability to recruit business,” Powell said.
The proposed amendment has drawn opposition from some surprising quarters, notably the Alabama Education Association, Alabama Arise (a group advocating for those in poverty), and by two predominantly black political organizations: the Alabama New South Alliance and the Alabama Democratic Conference.
Some of the objections stem from the belief that the language left behind will serve the purpose of a 1956 modification designed specifically to fight school desegregation.
Although the Alabama Democratic Party has taken no official stance on the amendment – or any of the proposed amendments — John Sawyer, financial director of the party, said the proposed amendment would take away the right to public education.
In another controversy, proposed Amendment 6 is aimed squarely at President Obama’s Affordable Healthcare Act, specifically “to prohibit any person, employer or health care provider from being compelled to participate in any health care system.”
“This is the way that the legislature, particularly the Republicans, is expressing their opposition to the Obama health care plan,” Powell said. “It’s more symbolic than anything else.”
Sawyer agreed, saying it doesn’t matter what voters do because the United States Supreme Court has already passed the health care plan. “The federal government supersedes it,” he said.
The proposal for Amendment 7 would “provide that the right of individuals to vote for public office, public votes on referenda or votes of employee representation by secret ballot is fundamental.” The intent: to keep union votes secret.
“Some union members argue that it’s intimidating to be on the record voting for a strike,” Powell said, adding that when employers can find out how their employees voted, the members tend to let that influence their vote.
Proposed Amendment 8 would “repeal the existing provisions for legislative compensation and expenses and establish the basic compensation of the Legislature at the median household income in Alabama; to require legislators to submit signed vouchers for reimbursement for expenses; and to prohibit the Legislature from increasing the compensation or expenses payable to its members.”
This proposal looks to hold legislators financially accountable by maintaining their salaries as equal to the median household income in Alabama. Who would be against this amendment, you ask?
“Some of the legislators may be opposed to it,” Powell laughed.
Proposed Amendments 9 and 10, both introduced by Representative Paul DeMarco (R-Jefferson County) on behalf of the Alabama Citizens for Constitutional Reform, are designed to “update” and “modernize” the constitution, removing “obsolete language” from articles dealing with corporations and banking. Amendment 9 seeks to remove language referring to telegraph usage and other outdated technologies from the Corporations Article, while Amendment 10 would remove language about the gold and silver standards from the Banking Article.
Powellis one of many in Alabama who favor wholesale revision of the state constitution. He’s also one of many who consider that unlikely in the near future, leaving piecemeal amendments the only way to change the document’s provisions. “It’s a shame,” Powell said, “that we have such a poor constitution and that we have to have this many amendments. But I don’t see anybody doing anything about it anytime soon.”
Finally, a sample ballot: