Former Governor Albert P. Brewer has been making a compelling argument for a new Alabama Constitution. He, along with a number of distinguished state leaders, is pushing for a new document to replace the 1901 Constitution. An example of the old Constitution’s antiquity is found in Article IV, Section 93, which provides: “The state shall not engage in works of internal improvements.” Governor Brewer recently penned an op-ed piece which addresses the situation and need for change.

The Brewer Article

Did you know that the Constitution of Alabama prohibits the state from building roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, docks, parks or other public facilities? All of these are “public improvements” and are expressly prohibited by Section 93 of the 1901 Constitution. Why was this section included in our constitution? Section 93 was brought forward from the 1875 Constitution which was adopted to “redeem” the state from reconstruction and to address the desperate economic conditions that existed then. Also, remember that in 1901 there were no automobiles, roads were unpaved, transportation was either by train or horse and buggy and there was little interest in public improvements.

The restrictions of these provisions led to a host of constitutional amendments to allow the state to build roads and bridges; to authorize the state docks at Mobile; to build hospitals and treatment centers; to construct buildings at colleges, universities and public schools; to develop inland docks; to construct a system of state parks; to support public libraries and to provide economic development incentives. Over the years, literally hundreds of amendments have been adopted so as to allow the state to engage in these important public improvement projects.

Simply stated, the 1901 Constitution was inadequate to deal with the realities of the 20th century, not to mention our world of 2008. Its prohibitions were so narrow and restrictive that state and local governments could not meet the needs of the state. Of the over 800 amendments, almost half were adopted to relieve the restrictions of Section 93.

The effect of the restrictions of the 1901 Constitution were dramatically illustrated when Mercedes Benz made its decision to locate a manufacturing facility in Tuscaloosa County. An important factor in its decision were commitments to incentives made by state leaders. Imagine their chagrin when they discovered that constitutional issues about the validity of the commitments existed because of the restrictions of Section 93. Fortunately these concerns were satisfactorily resolved, but the situation points up the lurking pitfalls in this obsolete document.

Advocates of constitutional reform usually make their case with references to the desirability of “home rule”, the disgusting racist language of the 1901 Constitution, its inordinate length, or its archaic language and provisions. In a very real way the provisions restricting the ability of state government to address problems and take advantage of opportunities may be the most compelling reason for a new constitution for Alabama.

If you agree with Governor Brewer, let your senators and house members know how you feel. I support the folks who want to bring our state into the 21st century. I also recognize there is opposition to change from a number of powerful special interests. The question is: Why do they oppose change? I believe they simply like the control over government at both the state and local levels the old document gives them.

Other Related Articles

• Alabama Needs A New Constitution
• Albert Preston Brewer
• Governor Bob Riley Leads Trade Mission To South America
• Alabama still needs a new constitution
• Constitution Convention Proposal Introduced