Lawmakers move forward with term limits, stronger veto power and removing racist language

A committee of Alabama senators approved legislation on Tuesday that would allow voters to decide if they want to remove racist language from the state constitution, limit how many terms a state lawmaker can serve, and give the governor stronger veto power.
"These represent monumental reforms," said Bryan Taylor, chairman of the Senate Committee on Constitution, Campaign Finance, Ethics and Elections.
The panel also passed out proposals that would require those utilizing robo-calls during campaigns to disclose who is paying for them, lowering the threshold for independent and third party candidates to get on the ballot in the state, and requiring electronic filing of campaign finance reports.
Taylor, R-Prattville, said term limits and giving the governor stronger veto power should make government more accountable and, he believes, lessen the influence of special interests.
Taylor said the proposal by Sen. Arthur Orr, R-Decatur, would "remove the most appalling segregationist" language from the state's 1901 constitution if approved by voters. Even though those sections are not utilized now, Taylor said the move would be "deeply symbolic" and help improve the state's image nationally and internationally.
"Like it or not, Alabama still has a reputation for racism," said Taylor, referring to grainy footage of the civil rights struggle in the state. "That seems to be what a lot of people think of when they think of Alabama."
He said the state deserves better.
Orr said the language should have been removed years ago and, if passed by the Legislature, would be on the ballot in the November 2012 general election.
A proposal by Sen. Trip Pittman, R-Daphne, would limit members of the House and Senate to serving three consecutive full terms.
Sen. Dick Brewbaker, R-Pike Road, wants to require the vote of three-fifths of lawmakers to override a veto by the governor. Currently, a simple majority can override a veto. But Brewbaker said any proposal that gets to the governor had to have the support of a simple majority to get there.
Brewbaker said there are not three "co-equal levels of government" now because the Legislature is clearly dominant and that his bill would give the governor an effective veto.
The committee passed another bill that would lower the threshold for third party or independent candidates to get on to the ballot in Alabama. If the Legislature approves the proposal, candidates would be required to get the signatures of 1.5 percent of eligible voters who voted in the last election. Sen. Cam Ward, R-Alabaster, said the 20 percent required now is the highest in the nation.
Ward, the sponsor, said the high threshold disenfranchises people by making ballot access difficult.
The committee carried over a bill that would provide for members of the military to vote electronically because the sponsor, Sen. Gerald Dial, R-Lineville, was not at the meeting.

-- posted by Sebastian Kitchen

Senate panel to consider term limits, military voting and removing racist language

Term limits, military voting on the web, and removing racist language from the state constitution are at the top of the agenda for the Senate Committee on Constitution, Campaign Finance, Ethics and Elections, according to the chairman.
Sen. Bryan Taylor, R-Prattville, said those are among the bills that will be considered during a meeting at 11 a.m. Tuesday in room 609A of the State House.
Sen. Trip Pittman, R-Montrose, has introduced a bill that would implement term limits for lawmakers.
Sen. Arthur Orr, R-Decatur, has proposed allowing voters to decide if they want to remove racist language from the state constitution.
Their colleague, Gerald Dial of Lineville, has introduced a bill that would provide for members of the military to vote electronically.
The committee will consider several other issues including requiring a supermajority of the Legislature to override a veto by the governor, a bill related to displaying the Ten Commandments, and requiring robo-calls to include a disclosure of who is paying for it.

-- posted by Sebastian Kitchen

Senators propose pay cut if budgets goes into proration

A bipartisan group of state senators said Tuesday they support a resolution that, beginning with the next state budgets, would cut the pay of state legislators equal to the level of budget cuts declared by the governor.
Some Republicans who slammed a 2007 pay raise that lawmakers voted for themselves do not believe the resolution goes far enough.
Senators who support the resolution said the measure was intended to encourage legislators to try to accurately balance the budgets.
Gov. Robert Bentley, a Republican, announced Monday that he was immediately declaring 3 percent proration in the current education budget and would soon declare 15 percent proration in the current General Fund budget, the source of funds for most non-education functions of state government including Medicaid, prisons, and public safety.
State law requires the budget to be balanced so the governor must declare proration, or across the board cuts, to balance revenue and spending.
If the resolution proposed on Tuesday passes, lawmakers' pay would be cut at the rate of proration beginning with the next budget year, which starts Oct. 1. The proposal would not affect the current fiscal year.
Sen. Paul Sanford, R-Huntsville, said he proposed the resolution because unrealistic budget forecasts hurt agencies and state employees, but legislators are not feeling the pain.
As a small businessman, Sanford said "when my employees feel the pain, I feel the pain."
He said this would be an incentive for lawmakers to be more cautious when assembling the budgets.
Lawmakers were asked why not make the resolution effective this budget year.
"There (are) many people in these chambers who didn't have anything to do with these budgets," Sanford said.
Senate Minority Leader Roger Bedford, D-Russellville, a former budget committee chairman, said the resolution would give more accountability to the budget process.
Senate President Pro Tem Del Marsh, R-Anniston, said he does not feel the support is there to roll back legislative pay levels to 2007, when lawmakers passed a more than 60 percent pay raise for themselves as one of their first acts of business. He believes the issue could bring the Senate to a stalemate. Marsh said any legislator who wants to turn down their pay raise can do so.
But some legislators want the pay level taken back to the 2007 level and want to remove the automatic cost of living increase that lawmakers included in that increase.
Republican Sens. Gerald Dial of Lineville and Bryan Taylor of Prattville want to roll back the pay increase.
Taylor said he has not seen a draft of the resolution, but understands "where some of my colleagues are coming from, particularly the freshmen." He said some of them took pay cuts and took jobs in the private sector to run.
"Many of us were not here in 2007," Taylor said.
But Taylor said he continues to support a repeal of the pay increase.
"I think the pay raise in 2007 was wrong," he said.
Taylor said any resolution cutting back pay "is a step in the right direction."
Marsh said the joint support for the resolution sets a good tone for the legislative session, which started Tuesday.

-- posted by Sebastian Kitchen

Dial will try to repeal pay raise

State Sen. Gerald Dial said Wednesday he would file a resolution to repeal the 62 percent pay raise that state lawmakers voted for themselves almost four years ago.
Dial, R-Lineville, said his resolution would restore the legislative expenses and salaries back to the 2006 level.
As one of their first acts after the 2006 election, lawmakers voted themselves a more than 60 percent increase in compensation in 2007.
"The pay raise granted in 2007 costs the taxpayers some $3 million per year, or $12 million over a four-year period," Dial said. "At the time it was passed, it was a bad idea. It is still a bad idea today with so many Alabamians out of work. Serving in the Alabama Legislature is not a full-time job, and the salaries should reflect that."
The senator said those who give their salary to charity are giving away money that should be returned to taxpayers.
"We all believe in helping charities, but this money belongs to taxpayers and should go to the general fund or education trust fund," he said.

-- posted by Sebastian Kitchen