In our opinion
December 31, 2002
In 1901, a group of propertied, professional, politically
powerful men gathered at the state capital. Their goals were simple
enough. They wanted to centralize government in Montgomery, where
they could control it. That would enable them to keep taxes low on
people like themselves. As a result they could keep state services
to most citizens minimal. And they wanted to make sure that African-Americans
and poor whites were not able to challenge this arrangement.
So they wrote a constitution that accomplished all these
things and stole the votes they needed to make it the law of the land.
They did their work well, for despite hundreds of amendments, Alabama’s
1901 constitution is still doing what it was written to do.
But change is in the wind. Shortly after the New Year
begins the grass-roots group, Alabama Citizens for Constitutional
Reform (ACCR), will present Gov. Bob Riley with its report and recommendations.
Alabama Secretary of State Jim Bennett, who chairs the ACCR commission
that is drawing up the report, believes that 2003 can be “a breakthrough
year” for the reform movement. A Capital Survey Research Center
poll recently showed that 61 percent of Alabama voters support constitutional
reform and in the last election nearly 900,000 citizens endorsed an
amendment to ensure that a new constitution would be submitted to
the voters for their approval.
The time is right, according to Bennett, “it’s
an issue on the table (and) there are more marchers in the parade.”
We agree.
But what about the governor?
Bob Riley can make or break the movement, but though
he says he is part of the parade, he seems to be marching to a different
drummer. Although our incoming governor supports constitutional reform,
his goals are much more limited than those of the ACCR and he disagrees
with Bennett’s group on how to bring reform about.
While the ACCR is seeking to write a new document, one
that would address most of the ills that have held Alabama back over
the past century, Riley’s aims are much more modest. Following
the blueprint laid down in his “Plan for Change,” he is
primarily interested in reducing some of the earmarking that dedicates
certain taxes for certain uses, giving county governments “at
least some measure of home rule so they can govern more effectively,”
and giving the governor a line-item veto.
However, he does not want this done by a constitutional
convention, which is the route to reform favored by the ACCR. Instead,
Riley would create the Alabama Citizens’ Constitutional Commission,
which would study the problems he tells them to study and recommend
solutions.
• • •
What about tax reform?
But will the Riley route to constitutional reform make
the government any better, any less, to use the words of newly appointed
finance direct Drayton Nabers, “regressive and oppressive?”
No. That won’t happen until Alabama reforms a constitutionally
created tax system that Nabers went on to describe as “quite
intolerable.” The governor-elect has said much the same thing,
yet for some reason Riley has not linked tax reform with constitutional
reform. This, we believe, is a critical mistake. However, the ACCR
has been studying the connection and we have every reason to believe
that its report will contain specific recommendations as to how a
new constitution can make our tax code fairer.
We hope our incoming governor will recognize the importance
of this and revise his plan to include tax reform as one of his commission’s
charges.
Although Riley spokesman, David Azbell, has indicated
that tax reform “is not a first-year goal” for the new administration,
we believe it should be. We believe that tax reform and constitutional
reform go hand in hand. To address one without addressing the other
would be a serious mistake.
Return to: Constitutional
Reform ~ In the News
Return
to: Editorial Index
