RSS Feed
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
View from Montgomery
Most importantly, she has been deeply involved in constitutional reform as co-chair of Alabama Citizens for Constitutional Reform and appointed by Gov. Riley as vice-chair of the Alabama Citizens Constitutional Commission. She is a shareholder in the prestigious Birmingham law firm of Sirote & Permutt and has been named one of the best lawyers in America in the field of health care. In 1998 she ran for governor in the Democratic Primary and polled 53,618 votes or 16.5 percent against the winner, Don Siegelman. It's too bad she didn't prevail ...particularly for Siegelman ...because he wouldn't be going to prison ...and for the state... because we would all probably be a lot better off. I had the opportunity recently, along with Dana Beyerle, capitol reporter for the New York Times Regional papers in Alabama (Florence, Tuscaloosa and Gadsden) and Sebastian Kitchen of the Mobile Press- Register, to question her about constitutional reform on Alabama Public Television's Friday night program For The Record. She is, indeed, a charming and articulate spokesperson for revision of our State Constitution. I also believe there needs to be some adjustments in our state's organic charter, but I believe it should be accomplished by incremental proposals adopted by the State Legislature and submitted to the people...not accomplished by the creation of a State Constitutional Convention by election, a body that would have the power to do just about anything...and particularly be able to hide bad things in a larger document and present the whole package as being "good for the citizens of Alabama." Even though the current proposal would prohibit more than a $100 contribution from anyone to a candidate for the convention, some have already called the proposed Constitutional Convention either the "ALFA Convention," the "Trial Lawyers Convention," the "Paul Hubbert Convention," or "The Business Council Convention." Whichever it became it would surely be the "Special Interest Convention." That is why the proposal for such a convention scares the hell out of me. At least, if we amend the constitution in the legislature, it must have a three-fifths vote of each house. That is not the case with a constitutional convention. Another reason for my concern is that, despite its problems, our state charter, in many instances, gives greater protections to the people than does the federal constitution. For example, here is what our current charter says about religious freedom: "That no religion shall be established by law; that no preference shall be given by law to any religious sect, society, denomination, or mode of worship; that no one shall be compelled by law to attend any place of worship; nor to pay any tithes, taxes or other rate for building or repairing any place of worship, or for maintaining any minister or ministry; that no religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office of public trust under the state; and that the civil rights, privileges, and capacities of any citizen shall not be in any manner affected by his religious principles." That this serious and important protection could be compromised by a "Special Interest Constitutional Convention," scares me. In the early 1970's, I spent a lot of time working on reforming Article VI of the state charter, the Judicial Article. That success made uniform a great many aspects of our state court system that needed consolidation and similar treatment for victims and villains throughout the state, but it was accomplished via the legislature's submission of a document to the people. The provisions of those changes do not need to be reversed by any perceived notion that we need more "home rule," which appears to be the primary reason that is being promoted for a convention to be called. I am pleased that Lawyer Pate said she would favor reform, even via the legislative route and then a vote of the people. I suggest she pursue that avenue. However, she told me after the show that if the convention route became law she would bet that she and I would both be candidates...and I probably would be. I take this opportunity to remind her that neither of us has fared well at the polls. I lost a legislative race in 1966, she a governor's race in 1998. Perhaps though, a second race for governor would be more kind to her.
Bob Martin is editor and publisher of The Montgomery Independent.
|
for larger version       |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
