|
|
|||
|
Opinion March 22, 2002 I was trying to think of an analogy that might help explain why the black caucus of the Alabama House of Representatives came out against a constitutional convention to rewrite the state’s 101-year-old constitution. The reason given by some members of the caucus is that they feared they would be left out of the process, and that a convention, without their skilled statesmanship, could produce a new constitution as bad or worse than the current one. As bad as the constitution of 1901? The constitution written with the stated goal of disfranchising blacks and poor whites, approved through a fraudulent election, and amended more than 700 times? The same constitution that allows some schools to be funded above the national average, while others particularly those in poor, rural areas and often serving mostly black students can’t afford to fix a leaky roof or buy textbooks for all students? Can we really do as bad even worse than the bloated dust collector we now have? Black involvement: As for the lack of black involvement in a convention to rewrite a new constitution, that claim was shot full of holes about as soon as it rolled off the legislators’ lips. Under the plan offered by the Alabama Citizens for Constitutional Reform, convention delegates would be chosen from each of the state’s House districts meaning the number of black delegates should at least equal the number of blacks in the House, which is 27. Blacks’ interests will be represented because blacks will be part of the convention. But the disingenuousness of that argument isn’t what irks me most. It’s the argument that the Legislature should do whatever rewrite is done so black legislators can guard against something going into the constitution that hurts the interests of blacks. “The same folks who put the first one together may be of similar minds to those who get elected to put this new one together,” is how Rep. John Rogers explained it. In other words, black legislators would protect the rights of black constituents. Well, let’s consider the legislators’ track record in being the people’s protectors. Two great examples are education and taxes. On education, the constitutional restrictions on property taxes, such as current use and the lid bill, make it difficult for poor school districts to adequately fund schools, and the earmarking of tax dollars hurts the ability to put money where it would do the most good. On taxes, Alabama has the nation’s worst tax system, thanks in large part to the constitution. A state income tax takes money out of the pockets of people who barely earn minimum wage, and sales taxes are among the nation’s highest, providing a silly subsidy to property owners who pay the lowest property taxes in the nation. Still, taxes come nowhere close to providing enough money for education or other state services. This strangling combination means that a poor black child growing up in Greene, Sumter or Choctaw, or any number of other Black Belt counties, is unlikely to receive adequate health care, will attend subpar schools, stands a good chance of working a low-paying job in a chicken-processing plant one of the few viable industries in some counties and will still see the government take part of his measly paycheck. In sum, the Legislature has failed the poor people of this state. Those who have failed include black legislators who represent a disproportionate percentage of the poor population. Being on the wrong side of the struggle for a new constitution is akin to siding with segregationists during the civil rights era. Maybe, that’s the analogy I was looking for. Getting the blame: Here’s another sad result of the black caucus’ stance. Black legislators will be blamed for the defeat of constitution reform. And blamed unfairly, since white legislators comprise the main opposition. Consider that of the five representatives from Jefferson County on record in support of a constitutional convention, four of them William Parker, George Perdue, Priscilla Dunn and Demetrius Newton are black. Only one white representative, Johnny Curry, wants a citizens convention. But look at who’s catching the heat. And for what? Power and greed. As long as the current system and constitution require all meaningful decisions to be made in Montgomery instead of in communities and county courthouses, legislators will exercise tremendous power. They use it to their benefit, not the people who elect them. That ought to be more clear now than ever. Eddie Lard is an editorial writer for The News and editor of the Commentary section. His e-mail address is elard@bhamnews.com. Return to: Editorial Index |
|||
| Alabama Citizens for
Constitutional Reform Foundation, Inc. P.O. Box 34 Montgomery, Alabama 36101-0034 E-mail: accr@constitutionalreform.org |
|||
| Home Page | Return to Top of Page | |||
|
