---

By John Anderson
January 13, 2002

   It’s the lottery of the 2002 race for governor, but this time everybody’s for it.

   The three front-runners in this year’s governor’s race say their campaigns will largely center on one issue: constitution reform.

   It’s not unheard of for a gubernatorial election to turn on one big issue. Just four years ago the idea of whether to enact a state lottery for education did just that.

   As with most one-issue elections, the candidates differed sharply over the issue. Demo cratic challenger Don Siegelman favored it; the man he beat that November, Gov. Fob James, opposed it.

   But this year Siegelman and his two top Republican opponents, Lt. Gov. Steve Windom and U.S. Rep. Bob Riley of Ashland, strongly advocate chunking the state’s 101-year-old constitution.

   “There’s not much spacing between Siegelman, Windom and Riley. I find it really remarkable,” said Wayne Flynt, a history professor at Auburn University and a long-time advocate of constitution reform.

   What’s even more remarkable is that just a year ago state politicians were at most just giving lip service to constitution reform, which many considered too arcane and complex to be a winning issue.

   Then, both Siegelman and Windom took a hands-off approach. There would have to be a grassroots demand for rewrite before they embraced it, they said, because a lot of voters viewed constitution reform as just a euphemism for tax increases.

   Now, consider their statements last week as the Legislature convened for its election-year session.

   “It’s a big issue in my campaign because it is part of the people taking back their government,” Windom said during an interview with Times editors. He said he plans to push two state constitutional amendments that would give county commissions limited “home rule,” the power to enact laws.

   Currently, city councils are the only local governments that have that power in all but two of Alabama’s 67 counties. Supporters of reform cite the current constitution’s centralization of power in Montgomery as a main argument for changing it.

   Barely 24 hours after Windom’s interview, Siegelman, using remarkably similar language, centered his State of the State speech on constitutional reform.

   “We have to rip the power out of the hands of the special interests, move it out of Montgomery and give it back to the people,” Siegelman said in his televised address.

   “I had to smile while watching Windom clap when Siegelman was talking about constitution reform,” said Brad Moody, a political scientist at Auburn University at Montgomery. “These two guys don’t agree on anything. They don’t even agree on when to go to the bathroom.”

   Flynt credits the education money crisis that began last spring with the sudden embrace of constitution reform.

   Critics of the current constitution say it enshrines ridiculously low property tax rates, robbing education of a more secure tax source than the volatile sales and income taxes the state must now rely on for money.

   Forced cuts in the education budget last year, and the threat of more this year, helped turn what had been just an abstract idea to most voters into something they now see affecting their children’s future, Flynt said.

   “I think if it hadn’t been for the education crisis, nobody would have connected the dots,” he said. “The public is not going to pay attention to something that complex unless something gets them riled up, and education has.”

   Moody links candidate interest in constitution reform to a deeper, but less defined, voter anger stemming from both the education crisis and the scandals swirling around Montgomery over unbid contracts and the alleged misuse of legislator “pork” money.

   “People have this general sense that state government ain’t working,” Moody said. “There’s some sort of vague connection” to constitution reform.

   Just how big a political change all the talk of reform portends for state government remains to be seen.
Voters could turn to the few candidates for governor who aren’t emphasizing it, such as Greenville businessman Tim James, who argues that constitution reform is a guise for taking God out of politics.

   And constitution reform may sound like a good thing to voters as a concept, but implementing it would undoubtedly stir strong opposition, especially on how to deal with state taxes.

   “This is a feel-good issue at this time. There’s no pain in it at all,” Moody said.

   But Flynt noted that both Riley and Windom are advocating specific reforms that just a year ago would have been almost unthinkable for Republican candidates for statewide office.

   Riley refused to make a no-tax-increase promise, a GOP tactic the party has repeatedly used to hammer “tax-happy” Democrats. And Windom, although giving no details, unambiguously says taxes need to be raised.

   During his Times interview, Windom stressed that cutting waste, demanding accountability and regaining voter confidence in state government are important parts of his campaign platform.

   But “I support additional taxes. We need more money in the system,” he said.

   “We need some more revenue. Period.”

   Said the liberal Flynt: “It makes you want to pinch yourself and see if you’re still in Alabama.”

You can reach Times Political Editor John Anderson at anderson@htimes.com

Return to: Editorial Index