Comments on: Constitution Reform: Progress If Not Success http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2006/03/31/constitution-reform-progress-if-not-success/ & Home of Lawn Mower Repair Sat, 31 Jul 2010 00:36:41 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Don http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2006/03/31/constitution-reform-progress-if-not-success/comment-page-1/#comment-28 Don Sat, 01 Apr 2006 19:45:00 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2006/03/31/constitution-reform-progress-if-not-success/#comment-28 I agree with those who say that any progress on controversial legislation is meaningful. Sen. Little likely had more success than he had expected this session because he was quoted early on saying he didn’t think the constitutional reform bill would advance this year and that he introduced it just to keep the issue alive. The sequence of small steps toward getting legislation approved which was presented in this post mirrors the slow and tedious progress on the issue I have spent many thousands of hours working on (visit my website devoted to that one issue @ http://www.doctoriq.com) over the last 2+ years – helping to make Alabama become the 25th state with an Initiative and Referendum [I&R] process for voters to have at their disposal to introduce needed reform and accountability legislation (which the legislature refuses to pass) that would bypass the legislature and the governor and be put on the ballot as a referendum for voters to vote up or down. I&R legislation has been introduced numerous times over the years, and until the 2005 legislative session it had never even been voted on by a committee, but it was approved by the House of Representatives Constitution and Elections committee then. In the current session the same bill was introduced as HB325, again was unanimously passed by the same committee, and actually was put on the calendar and sent to the floor for open debate. After about an our of debate, Representative Mike Ball knew – from the strong opposition of legislators, who want to keep every ounce of power in their hands while their lobbyist, labor leader, and other “Big Mule” friends that control them shove re-election funds into their pockets -- that his bill had no chance of being approved, so he withdrew it. But, before he did, he got a recorded vote on a Budget Isolation Resolution that would have to be approved before a vote on the bill itself could be requested. By doing so, the 22 legislators who voted “No” exposed themselves as being against I&R, which essentially means that they don’t trust their constituents to use I&R wisely and not at their expense. The names of those 22 are shown @ http://www.doctoriq.com/report.htm. Anyway, it was another step down a long path toward a better state government, and something to build on in the next few years. Hopefully, by 2010, we will succeed. I apologize for posting such a long comment, but I think I&R is an important issue that the public needs to learn about, and then demand from their legislators. I agree with those who say that any progress on controversial legislation is meaningful. Sen. Little likely had more success than he had expected this session because he was quoted early on saying he didn’t think the constitutional reform bill would advance this year and that he introduced it just to keep the issue alive.

The sequence of small steps toward getting legislation approved which was presented in this post mirrors the slow and tedious progress on the issue I have spent many thousands of hours working on (visit my website devoted to that one issue @ http://www.doctoriq.com) over the last 2+ years – helping to make Alabama become the 25th state with an Initiative and Referendum [I&R] process for voters to have at their disposal to introduce needed reform and accountability legislation (which the legislature refuses to pass) that would bypass the legislature and the governor and be put on the ballot as a referendum for voters to vote up or down.

I&R legislation has been introduced numerous times over the years, and until the 2005 legislative session it had never even been voted on by a committee, but it was approved by the House of Representatives Constitution and Elections committee then. In the current session the same bill was introduced as HB325, again was unanimously passed by the same committee, and actually was put on the calendar and sent to the floor for open debate. After about an our of debate, Representative Mike Ball knew – from the strong opposition of legislators, who want to keep every ounce of power in their hands while their lobbyist, labor leader, and other “Big Mule” friends that control them shove re-election funds into their pockets — that his bill had no chance of being approved, so he withdrew it. But, before he did, he got a recorded vote on a Budget Isolation Resolution that would have to be approved before a vote on the bill itself could be requested. By doing so, the 22 legislators who voted “No” exposed themselves as being against I&R, which essentially means that they don’t trust their constituents to use I&R wisely and not at their expense. The names of those 22 are shown @ http://www.doctoriq.com/report.htm.

Anyway, it was another step down a long path toward a better state government, and something to build on in the next few years. Hopefully, by 2010, we will succeed.

I apologize for posting such a long comment, but I think I&R is an important issue that the public needs to learn about, and then demand from their legislators.

]]>