Statewide Amendment 1

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 2022, to amend Section 71.01 authorizing the Legislature to sign and transmit local laws or constitutional amendments before the transmission of basic appropriations.

Proposed by Act 2023-562 (Senate Bill 3, 2023 Second Special Session)
Bill Sponsor: Senator Chambliss

When voters go to the polls on Tuesday, March 5, they won’t just be voting in the Democratic or Republican primaries; they’ll also vote on an amendment to the Alabama Constitution of 2022.

Amendment 1 proposes simplifying the process of moving resolutions and local legislation through the Legislature before the state budgets are passed.

Printable PDF available here

If the amendment passes, a 3/5 vote of the Legislature would no longer be required before considering the passage of a resolution, local legislation, or a local constitutional amendment.

Proposed Amendment 1 is actually a tweak of the amendment championed by Gov. Fob James, which was ratified back in 1984. The amendment was aimed at focusing the Legislature on its most important job: passing the education and general fund budgets. It was designed to make it hard to bring up other legislation before the budgets passed.

Currently, until the budgets pass, every piece of Legislation requires two votes: one for what’s called a Budget Isolation Resolution, which requires three-fifths support to allow consideration, and a second vote on the piece of legislation itself.

While Amendment 1 will ease the process for resolutions and local legislation, the higher vote threshold (required prior to the passage of the budgets) remains in place for general laws, laws that apply statewide. Local constitutional amendments will still require a three-fifths vote to pass. They just won’t require two votes, one for a BIR and a second vote on the measure.

The original purpose of the 1984 amendment was to avoid last-minute scrambles to pass budgets. That didn’t happen. Budgets still tend to be worked on until the waning days of the session. Budgets are complicated and involve a lot of give and take. They are the culmination of a process, but they also are not all-consuming. Legislative action on other matters doesn’t necessarily get in the way of making progress on the budget.

In some circumstances, the BIR procedure does provide a mechanism for blocking or delaying consideration of controversial legislation. If more than one-third of members of either the House or Senate oppose a bill, they can band together and prevent consideration.

That blocking mechanism was more in play when the Legislature was more evenly divided along party or interest group lines. It is less relevant now that the Republicans hold a super-majority in both houses. The BIR can still come into play on bills that cut across party lines, but, for the most part, nowadays, it is simply an extra step in the legislative process.

The proposed amendment’s focus on local legislation stems, in part, from a series of lawsuits that questioned the validity of some local laws based on BIR-related votes. The Constitution requires “three-fifths of a quorum present” to vote on the BIRs. But Alabama House of Representatives rules and practice allowed BIRs to pass if three-fifths of those voting voted yes. Even though the legislative and constitutional fixes have reaffirmed previously passed legislation, proponents want to avoid future challenges by exempting local legislation.

The amendment doesn’t address the more fundamental issue of whether the state Legislature should be voting on local legislation at all. In other states, local governments have more power to conduct their own affairs. In those state the Legislature focuses on statewide policy. In Alabama, in 2023, 30% of the bills passed by the State Legislature applied to a specific county or locality, according to a PARCA analysis of legislative records. Further, the bulk of the Alabama Constitution is made up of amendments that apply to specific counties and localities. That inclusion of local matters in the state constitution helps make Alabama’s Constitution by far the longest state constitution in the U.S.

Another state constitutional amendment is on the ballot March 5, but only in Dale County. Voters there will decide whether mayors in the county are allowed to participate in the state’s retirement system.

In 2022, Alabama adopted a “new” constitution, an improved and reorganized version of the Alabama Constitution of 1901. The vote was the culmination of decades of advocacy and was rightly celebrated.

The new Constitution removed the racist and unconstitutional provisions that were relics of the White Supremacist 1901 Constitution.

Printable PDF version available here

It reorganized the document, moving relevant statewide amendments into their proper place in the main body of the Constitution, removing duplicative and repealed provisions, and organizing local constitutional amendments by county to the end of the document.

But is the work finished?

Is Alabama free from the shackles of the anti-democratic and pre-modern Constitution of 1901? Or are fundamental flaws still embedded in our Constitutional DNA?

Despite the new Constitution, we remain governed by the basic operating system established by the 1901 Constitution. And that operating system was recognized as obsolete and an obstacle almost as soon as it was adopted.

Alabama Governor Emmet O’Neal, in a 1914 address, observed, “No real or permanent progress is possible in Alabama until the present fundamental law is thoroughly revised and adapted to meet present conditions.”

Have those revisions been made? In this election year, the Public Affairs Research Council of Alabama (PARCA) will examine that question.

PARCA was founded to provide objective, non-ideological research to citizens and leaders, supporting the improvement of state and local governments. PARCA research is intended to help governments function efficiently and effectively in hopes that those governments provide equal treatment and opportunity to the people of Alabama.

As the Constitution is fundamental to the functioning of state and local governments, it has been a central focus of PARCA’s work.

Over the next year, PARCA will issue a series of reports examining Alabama’s current constitutional framework, identifying remaining obstacles to a modern constitution and possible paths forward in areas such as education, economy, healthcare, democracy, liberty & justice, finances, and related areas.

The project is supported, in part, by the Alabama Citizens for Constitutional Reform (ACCR). Both ACCR and PARCA are nonpartisan organizations, and our members and supporters are Republicans, Democrats, and independents. Former Governor Albert Brewer and former Samford University President Thomas Corts, both deceased, were founding leaders in both organizations.

The mission of ACCR is to educate and advocate for an Alabama Constitution that protects and enhances life for all Alabama citizens. To that end, ACCR has two branches:

1. A foundation that focuses on educating the public about the Alabama Constitution and underlying issues that affect our citizens.
2. A nonprofit advocacy organization that works to improve the Constitution.

The foundation is providing support for PARCA’s re-examination of the Alabama Constitution. ACCR’s advocacy organization will use the research to recalibrate its ongoing work on Constitutional reform.

Alabama’s Constitution of 2022 is still, by far, the longest state constitution in the United States, three times as long as the next longest state constitution. Though now better organized, it is still complex and contradictory.

It is not a basic template and statement of principles, which should be the ideal. It more closely resembles a law code, with almost 500 pages worth of amendments that relate to localities rather than to the state as a whole.

Alabama voters have finally removed the most noxious provisions of the Constitution of 1901, which was explicitly formulated to strip the political rights of Black Alabamians, but which also disenfranchised poor whites. Gone are provisions that mandated segregated schools. Deleted are provisions allowing for involuntary servitude for those convicted of crimes. The Constitution now recognizes that females have a right to vote.

But other aspects of the Constitution remain unchanged. Power is still concentrated in the hands of the state Legislature in Montgomery. Should that power be more dispersed? Should citizens be able to initiate change and call for referendums, rights available to citizens in other states? Should more decisions be made by local communities rather than by legislators in Montgomery?

Alabama still collects less in state and local taxes than virtually any other state through a constitutionally-embedded tax system that falls disproportionately on poor Alabamians. At the same time, low taxes, particularly on property, reflect voters’ preferences. Are there changes voters would support that could increase adequacy and fairness?

Thanks to the Constitution, Alabama still earmarks more revenue than any other state. That limits legislators’ ability to shift revenue toward pressing priorities. On the other hand, voters like earmarks and don’t necessarily trust lawmakers. Is there a way to change the culture of distrust with changes that increase both flexibility and accountability? 

Does the Constitution inhibit economic development and mass transportation? Does it promote public safety and justice? Does it adequately promote the general welfare, health, and education?

Alabama’s Constitution should reflect our values. It should promote engagement in our democracy and free and fair elections. It should provide for equality of opportunity and equal treatment under the law. With the adoption of the Constitution of 2022, the people of the state took a step forward, removing obvious anti-democratic and discriminatory provisions left from a darker past.

But does the Constitution reflect the needs and aspirations of Alabamians today? Does it provide us with the outlines of a modern, efficient, effective, and responsive government? Is there still a need for Constitutional reform? We will explore those questions in the months to come.