The state constitution of Alabama mandates racially segregated schools and allows for poll taxes. These provisions have long since been ruled unconstitutional and unenforceable, but some Alabamans want them deleted anyway, for the sake of the state’s image. An amendment to strike the language will be on the 11/2 ballot. But a movement, led by former Judge “10 Commandments” Roy Moore, is campaigning against the amendment, claiming it’s a backdoor effort to raise taxes. (One of the clauses to be deleted declares that education at public expense is not a constitutional right in Alabama – that was added in the '50s in an effort to evade implementing the Brown v. Board of Education decisions.) Story linked here: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041021/ap_on_re_us/segregation_amendment_1
What’s up with this? Moore has identified himself mainly with the religious-conservative movement – which has deep roots in a traditionally racist segment of the population, but, what with the “Promise Keepers” and everything, I thought they were trying to put all that behind them and reach out to religious-conservative blacks.
Roy Moore has shown himself to be a grandstander. An attention whore of the highest order. I would not be suprised if he actually holds some of the convictions he champions, but I think the attention he gets for being so “outspoken” is his primary motivation. I would not consider him representative of any group larger than himself alone.
I’m sure it’s too close to the vote to make any changes. Anyway, why would anybody, in this day an age, have a problem with including the right to an education in a state constitution? What’s Moore thinking?
I sincerely hope that this amendment passes. There has been little public discussion about this and many voters are not even aware that it’s on the ballot. It’s embarrassing that this language is still on Alabama’s constitution, and it’s way past time to get it off of there and move on.
My biggest concern is that Alabama has a history of voting “No” on any and all amendments, to the extent that many times persons writing an amendment word them strangely so that a “No” vote will get the desired result. For this amendment to pass, it will be necessary for the “Yes” votes to prevail. We’ll know by Wednesday.
I don’t doubt that Roy Moore opposes it, simply because it gives him another chance to make a grandstand play. I live here and try to keep informed, but this is the first time I’ve heard about the Good Judge expressing an opinion on the matter.
Roy Moore held a “huge rally” this summer to show support for his stand on the Ten Commandments. Wags suggested that there were more security personnel there than there were local demonstrators. The crowd totaled about 500, with an estimated 400 of those having come in buses from Indiana. If you guys want Roy up there, I’ll spring for his bus ticket to Terre Haute.
However, an amendment repealing the constitutional prohibition on interracial marriages did pass a few years ago. I suspect this one will pass, as well. But if it fails, the bright side is that it may make a much-needed rewrite of the state’s archaic constitution more appealing to the public.
As the article says, Moore claims that removing that language might lead to the courts ordering property taxes to be raised to pay for underfunded schools.
I’m not him, but I’d assume that he’d say that first off, he’s opposed to property taxes or other taxes being raised, and secondly, if taxes are going to be raised, they should be raised by the elected legislature, and not by unelected judges.
And, more generally, that children don’t have some sort of constitutional right to a public education, and it’s wrong to say they do.
CNN just reported that the vote on this amendment was too close to call and there’s going to be recount. Can any Alabaman Dopers fill us in with more details?
One thing to keep in mind is that it seems that Moore and Christian Coalition leader John Giles do want the racist language removed, but in a different manner than is currently on the ballot.
The CNN article is a little vague on how they propose to lead the way to remove it in the next election, but let’s hear them out before we lambast them TOO much.
For over a week, a friend of mine and I tried to find out what this amendment was. The only thing we ever were able to find was the two-sentence summary that appeared on the ballot. The Bama Sec of State has a site that is supposed to be where voters can go to learn about the items on the ballot. There were about 9 amendments to be voted on. None of the links that were supposed to take us to the full text of the amendments worked. Couldn’t find it with a regular Google search either.
In this state, we are accustomed to misleading laws and amendments, so we don’t trust them very much. I never did find out what was really in this one, but I went ahead and voted for it. The local news claims that most of the people who voted against it did so because of the tax language. Sadly, the previous items in this thread had more info on the nature of this tax language than I have seen on the news, heard on my radio, or found on the Bama gov’t web site.
I voted no on pretty much all of the other amendments because the summaries were worded in such a way that they appeared to be intended to mislead. I think most other people follow the same policy.
Personally, I’d like to dump Roy Moore and Michael Moore into the interdimensional corridor from The Alternative Factor and let them eternally battle for the totle of Grand Universal Bombast Champion.
Oh, I don’t know. At least I understand where Michael Moore is coming from, even if he is misguided. Having lived in the same state with Roy Moore, I am convinced that whatever punishment you devise probably isn’t good enough.
Even I, a confirmed liberal, see how this would look to a suspicious voter like logrolling of two separable question: one over whether to eliminate obsolete racist provisions, another over what to replace them with in the specific issue of education.
The latter is too easy to turn into an issue of (a) “they’re gonna use education as an excuse to raise my taxes” and (b) “they’re gonna have some central authority mucking up with my local school district and/or our private schools”.
The CC will likely propose dumoing the racist language but having the “right to education” article be one about “Right of parents to choose their children’s education”, enshrining school choice, the right of parochial schools and homeschoolers to do their thing w/o interference from the state (but allowing them to receive its aid), and stating that all taxes and levies for schools must be spent within the school district where raised.
