Alabama and Constitutional Reform

Tuesday, 21 February 2006 06:32

By Don Casey
February 20, 2006

The Alabama Legislative Senate committee, "Constitution, Campaign Finance, Ethics & Elections", held a public hearing on Senate Bill 52 (SB52) on February 15th 2006.  The Bill, if passed, would ask Alabama voters on a special statewide election to be held on November 7th, 2006, ""Do you favor the holding of a constitutional convention for the purpose of revising the Constitution of Alabama of 1901?" "Yes ( ) No ( )".

This question has been condensed into a simplistic sales slogan, "just let the people vote"....

             * * *  * * *   *   * * *  * * *

The Alabama Legislative Senate committee, "Constitution, Campaign Finance, Ethics & Elections", held a public hearing on Senate Bill 52 (SB52) on February 15th 2006.  The Bill, if passed, would ask Alabama voters on a special statewide election to be held on November 7th, 2006, ""Do you favor the holding of a constitutional convention for the purpose of revising the Constitution of Alabama of 1901?" "Yes ( ) No ( )".

This question has been condensed into a simplistic sales slogan, "just let the people vote".  The slogan used by proponents of the bill, led by Greater Birmingham Ministry" (GBM) (think - what happened to the separation of church and state?) and the "Alabama Citizens for Constitutional Reform" ACCR mask the malicious doctrine that they desire a new Constitution.   Their draconian desires are easily understood by reading the "Legislative Findings" in SB52.  The section contains a list that describes the proponent's assessment of the current Constitution's failings.  A review of that list reveals the concepts desired in a new Constitution structured under the auspices of the GBM, ACCR, and their ilk. 

* "That Alabama's Constitution, as the state's living fundamental law,"
  
    This phrase lays the premise that the "law" of the land is a living document.  If this were true - what is legal today could be illegal tomorrow and vice versus.  The true nature of law is quite the contrary.  In a society of free men, law is intended to be rock solid, immovable and immutable.  Proponents of this philosophy would have Alabama move further down the path that is exemplified by the Federal government's bureaucracy which writes and enforces rules and regulations intended to implement the policy of the government.  The failed Federal system has also produced an "activist judicial system" that produces judicial rulings, which has demonstrated a preponderance to be far more devastating to the freedoms of society. 
  
* Today the Alabama Constitution is "an unsound document which lacks legal integrity, moral force, and spiritual strength for the forward guidance of Alabama and her people in the 21st Century and beyond."

     Constitutions have never been and should never be a document that provides "moral force" or a guide for "spiritual strength".  Constitutions are a covenant, a contract between the people, wherein all political power resides and are designed to limit the authority of those in power.  The restraining limitations set out in Constitutions therefore allow a free society to exist.  Proponents of this philosophy would gleefully merge religious tenets with a political document producing a Constitution designed to enforce their concept of morality.

* "That Alabama's voters are intelligent, insightful, wise, and spiritual, and thus, totally trustworthy to decide fundamental questions of current and future state policy and law,"

     This phrase lacks the essential component, "knowledge".  Without a thorough knowledge and understanding of the current Constitution, it is impossible to structure a new Constitution that would be superior to the old.  The lack of knowledge is comparable to a "black hole" and is exemplified by the response to the following questions posed over the passed several general elections to candidates running for office:

"What is the purpose or object of government and where may the answer be found?"

Sadly, candidates for judicial office who are typically lawyers, a profession that should have the answer on the tip of their tongue, have, without exception, failed to reply with a correct response.  These intelligent and yet unknowledgeable leaders of society vying for political office include the current governor.  Every Alabamian graduating from high school should, because the State school system requires the curriculum to include the Alabama Constitution, know the correct answer and where the answer is found.  Unfortunately, this is not the case.  Until the State school system educates sufficient generations of Alabamians in the concepts and principles of the current Constitution, a moratorium must be called on all legislation calling for a rewrite of the current Constitution. 

Oh, - the answer is found in Article I Section 35 of the 36 "Bill of Inalienable (God Granted) Rights" expressed the 1901 Constitution:
Sec. 35. Objective of government:
     "That the sole object and only legitimate end of government is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and when the government assumes other functions it is usurpation and oppression."

Given that the desired tenets of a new Constitution proposed by the GBM and ACCR are so alien to the concept inherent in most Alabamians, one should reasonably inquire, is there a motivating factor that can be identified that would account for this longstanding call for a rewrite of the Alabama Constitution?  Providing the answer to that question during the public hearing was Ken Freeman, Chairman of the Alliance for Citizen Rights.  Mr. Freeman disclosed a list of foundations that have supplied the resources, i.e. money to the GBM and ACCR for the incessant call for a rewrite of Alabama's Constitution.  The following are Mr. Freeman's remarks:

The New Carpetbaggers

I would like to congratulate the "Alabama Citizens for Constitutional Reform" (ACCR) and Greater Birmingham Ministries (GBM) for another fine turn out. I know it took a lot of work and a lot of money. I understand that the Ford Foundation even paid four or more full time employees to collect signatures for an entire year. Ford and other foundations have been very good to this so-called grass-roots movement.

And your efforts have not gone unnoticed. I recently ran across an article on page 34 in the United Nations Magazine, "UPAN", under "Governance" entitled "Alabama Constitutional Reform Draws Many Supporters." 

Why, I wondered was the United Nations so interested in Alabama's constitution? And why do these folks always talk about "governance" instead of "government"? These are highly educated people, who for the most part make their living through the use of words. One would assume that they should know the meaning of the language selected, and be careful of the terms they use.

So I looked them up. These terms are defined in Webster's Dictionary as follows:

Governance: the exercise of authority, direction, or control; either by a public official or a private guardian.
Government: the exercise of authority, direction or restraint… according to established constitutional laws and usages.

There is a big difference. Governance is control by bureaucratic decisions alone. Government is based on a constitution and a system of laws to implement it.

If the Ford Foundation was paying for full time employees, then I wondered how much more money was coming into Alabama from outside our state to create this so-called grass-roots movement. Our researchers went to the Internet and looked for a money trail. 

Below is a table containing the outside money we were able to document from these foundations own web sites. (There is certainly much more that we have not found.)

A. Grants and the Ford Foundation
"In 2003, Greater Birmingham Ministries (GBM) received grants from the Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation and the Ford Foundation for conducting grassroots constitutional reform education. In 2005, we renewed our Babcock Foundation grant and also received financial support from the Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham. The main focus of our Constitutional Reform (CR) Education Campaign is to work with communities--faith-based and otherwise--throughout Alabama to analyze and discuss our severely outdated 1901 state constitution."  Source:   http://www.gbm.org/CREC.htm

In 2001: Greater Birmingham Ministries received $500,000. (That's half a million dollars) for the Alabama Organizing Project; subject: Governance.
In 2002:  Greater Birmingham Ministries received $60,000. Subject: Governance.
In  2003: GBM received $200,000. Subject: Governance. Purpose: For state wide faith-based, ecumenical constitutional reform education and community organizing project.

Notice the 2001 grant is for the Alabama Organizing Project. Keep in mind that GBM was responsible for this. Apparently, they must have been getting money even before I started gathering information on these grants since the AOP was formed in 1998:

The Alabama Organizing Project grants from Ford Foundation we found are:

Year 2004:
http://www.fordfound.org/grants_db/view_grant_detail.cfm?grant_id=233827
Organization:     Southern Organizing Cooperative
Purpose:           General support to enhance the effectiveness and impact of grassroots organizing groups in the U.S. South
Unit:                 Governance and Civil Society
Amount:       $ 350, 000.

Year 2003:            http://www.fordfound.org/grants_db/view_grant_detail.cfm?grant_id=231848
Organization:     Southern Organizing Cooperative
Purpose:           General support to promote and bolster community organizing efforts
Unit:     Governance and Civil Society
Amount:        $ 324, 489.

B. The Man Behind Greater Birmingham Ministries
As stated on numerous websites and documents, Scott Douglas is the director of Greater Birmingham Ministries. Here's an excerpt from the Ford Foundation.

Scott Douglas with Greater Birmingham Ministries helped develop the Alabama Organizing Project funded by the Ford Foundation.
Source: http://www.fordfound.org/elibrary/documents/5018/009.cfm

The connection between ACCR and the Greater Birmingham Ministries/Scott Douglas can also be found on ACCR's own website:
Scott Douglas Remarks at ACCR Rally
On January 31, 2005 Scott Douglas gave the following remarks at the Birmingham Chapter of ACCR's petition rally.

"GBM is working in cooperation with ACCR and others across the state to develop and implement some ongoing workshops, faith and community based workshops and discussions connecting …  how those concerns are aided or frustrated by the Constitution… and where we can play our role in being producers and not just consumers of governance. " Source: http://www.constitutionalreform.org/speeches/speech1.shtml

Also, the Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation donated to GBM (with ACCR) $150,000. - To reform the 1901 Constitution, and to develop facilitation and curriculum for constitutional reform.

TOTAL DONATIONS from Ford and other foundations outside Alabama: OVER 1.6 million dollars. (This figure does not include 2005 donations, which would probably be substantial considering the amount of activity that year.)

If this is a grass-roots movement, then that grass is fertilized by money and watered by deception. This is the best grass-roots movement that money can buy!

This is not the first time that outside forces have come into Alabama to steal our land and tax us out of existence.  But now, we know them for what they are, "the new carpetbaggers." 
                                                             Kenneth Freeman, ACR

Among the able and vocal opponents of the rewrite was Mr. Buddy Hanson, "Grace & Law - Christian Policy Network" the following are his comments.

SB 52 Public Hearing Statement
February, 14, 2006

I'm Buddy Hanson, President of the Tuscaloosa-based Christian Policy Network. The Christian Policy Network seeks to frame legislative discussions according to biblical principles. Since only His Word is true, any legislative plan we have to improve Alabama will fail unless it conforms to Biblical principles (Psalm 119.160; 2 Samuel 7.28; John 14.6; Colossians 1.5; 2 Timothy 2.25; Revelation 21.5) My comments are to the Christians on this committee. Since non-Christians, by definition don't believe in absolute truth and believe you can make your own rules as you go along, you can put your thoughts on snooze control for a minute.

The Bible invented capitalism and self-government, not socialism, fascism, or Marxism, and/or tyrannical central government (all of which are endorsed by the supporters of SB52). Those who endorse a new constitution favor

* the re-distribution of wealth 
* taking property from property owners, and 
* having the state make decisions by legislative fiat (like raising taxes) that should be the responsibility of its citizens.

As you know, these ideas are anti-Christian, or, if you will, ungodly and blasphemous and puts the state in the position of attempting to say it knows better than God how we should govern ourselves. In addition, they are anti-American and reflect the values of the French Revolution instead of the American Revolution. Every war America has ever been in has been against tyrants who supported the very ideas that proponents of a re-write of our 1901 Constitution. Every war! Indeed, there is not one despicable dictator in history who wouldn't support a re-write of our Constitution because it takes the voice away from citizens and gives it to the state. I know that this lesson of history is meaningless to non-Christians, since they don't believe in absolute truth, but as Christians, you do believe in history and also believe that it's far better to learn from the lessons of history than to repeat them.

You are also well aware that at any moment we are either imaging Christ (by living and legislating according to His rules) or Satan, (by living according to our rules) and that every day as you step from your home, office, or hotel, your first duty is to bring glory and honor to God in everything you say and do. So, I'm just reminding you to do that by opposing this piece of anti-Christian legislation, and also thanking you in advance for fearing God, not man, and for being more concerned that you might hurt Christ's feelings, than the feelings of a non-Christian.

Visit Mr. Hanson's website at: www.graceandlaw.com

It has been stated that "a people who desire to remain free and ignorant - wish for that which never was and hope for that which never will be".

A footnote:
The House Committee on "Constitution and Elections" by a 7 to 7 vote refused to pass the bill out of Committee, the bill is for this year a dead issue. The real danger of passage will come next year when the newly installed elected officials will have three years to help the voters forget their first term voting record.  Vigilance is required!