[lg policy] Pondering Amendment 4: If Alabama is cleaning up its constitutional language, do it properly

[Harold Schiffman]

Monday, Oct. 29, 2012
Anniston, Alabama

Pondering Amendment 4: If Alabama is cleaning up its constitutional
language, do it properly

by Wayne Flynt/Special to The Star

Oct 28, 2012
Have you ever listened to a between two friends about a complicated
issue? Because you find some truth in both arguments, you change back
and forth as each makes his case. My not overly educated (at least in
the formal sense) but very wise father described such argument this
way: “There ain’t no dime so thin it ain’t got two sides.” That pretty
much summarizes my view of Amendment 4 on which we will vote Nov. 6.

On one side are many of my political, business, and religious friends
who correctly argue that we need to remove racist language from the
thoroughly racist 1901 Constitution. As Republican state senator
Arthur Orr, author of Amendment 4, stated, “I find it offensive … that
it’s still in my state’s governing document.” I agree.

But I do find it curious that Orr only finds the language offensive,
not the racist policies which gave rise to the language. Furthermore,
I find it amazing that he has endorsed Roy Moore as Supreme Court
chief justice, the very Republican who mobilized a coalition that
defeated the last attempt to remove the same racist language.

Why Orr’s change of heart? Well, it has lots to do with deleting the
offensive language, which has been made legally meaningless anyway
because federal dourts struck it down, while leaving in tact racist
policies that will cripple Alabama for decades.

Other friends — in AEA, black political leaders, other religious
friends—argue that the key to understanding the differences in the
sides of the dime is found in what was included in the amendment last
time compared to this time. The amendment that Roy Moore’s forces
killed (and for which I voted) proposed not only to remove the racist
language that shames Alabama but also the racist policy that Alabama
legislators almost unanimously added to our Constitution two years
after the Supreme Court’s Brown decision in 1954.

Desperately trying to keep black students separate from whites and
unequal, legislators voted and citizens passed an amendment that said
the state did not guarantee any child the right to a public education.
Now if you think we have a problem with bad language, try recruiting a
Korean company like Hyundai or Kia by telling them their children who
relocate here are not guaranteed a public education. Watch Koreans
run!

In terms of practical consequences, returning to the original language
of the 1901 Constitution which guaranteed a “liberal system of public
schools for the benefit of every child … between the ages of seven and
twenty-one years” would mean we might have to fund public schools at
close to the same rate per child as Mississippi. That would cost us
approximately $1 billion more annually in new taxes. Which is the
reason Moore and his cohort opposed the last amendment to strip the
Constitution of both racist language and policy.

If Republican leaders are correct when they tell us that racist
constitutional language cripples economic development, I need some
help with their other messages. They keep telling us that anti-union
policies, low corporate taxes, minimal state regulation and state tax
incentives (which we are being asked to increase in another amendment
in November) have made Alabama a Mecca for companies that can’t wait
to relocate here. Indeed, every year they trumpet SITE SELECTION
magazine’s list of the most business- friendly states. Turns out
Alabama wins more national championships in that magazine than we do
in the NCAA. Apparently the racist language that the courts have
overturned has not hurt us too much.

What imperils Alabama’s future is not language. It is chronic
under-funding of public schools. It is an increasingly large pool of
indigent students, an unprepared labor force unable to compete
successfully in a global economy, a frightful high school drop-out
rate, high school students not prepared for college and many of our
brightest college graduates who leave Alabama for better careers
elsewhere as soon as they graduate.

After often switching sides during the past six months, I finally
decided to vote against Amendment 4, though I agree with its intent. I
vote “no” because we need to have a serious conversation about the
pernicious policies of our racial past, not about its hateful
language.

Wayne Flynt is a distinguished university professor emeritus at Auburn
University.

Read more: Anniston Star - Pondering Amendment 4 If Alabama is
cleaning up its constitutional language do it properly

http://annistonstar.com/bookmark/20640988-Pondering-Amendment-4-If-Alabama-is-cleaning-up-its-constitutional-language-do-it-properly

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents.
Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal,
and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message.
 A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman,
Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list