Redistricting plan goes to a conference committee
On Friday, the Alabama House of Representatives passed a Republican congressional redistricting plan that it hopes will comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Alabama Senate voted 30 to 0 to non-concur with the House plan. The redistricting plan has been referred to a conference committee to produce a compromise version that is acceptable to both Houses of the Legislature. For redistricting to pass out of the Legislature, the six-member conference committee has to reach a compromise. Then both Houses of the Legislature must vote to concur with the findings of the conference committee. Senate Bill 5 is sponsored by State Senator Steve Livingston (R-Scottsboro). The bill was carried in the House of Representatives by State Representative Chris Pringle (R-Mobile). Both Livingston and Pringle have introduced competing versions of the redistricting bill. The version of the bill that passed in the House is the Pringle version, the community of interest plan. Pringle’s plan would redraw Alabama’s Second Congressional District, currently represented by Congressman Barry Moore (R-AL02), to increase the Black voting age population in CD2 from 30% of the population to over 42%. Senate Democrats have introduced multiple plans that would produce two majority-minority districts. Livingston’s competing plan passed out of the Senate on Wednesday. Pringle says that his plan’s CD2 would meet the Supreme Court’s ruling that the state provides an opportunity for Blacks to pick a candidate of their choice. Democrats disagree. “You are giving me an opportunity to lose,” said Senate Minority Leader Bobby Singleton (D-Greensboro). “There ain’t no opportunity there for Blacks or Democrats in that district,” said Sen. Rodger Smitherman (D-Birmingham). Democrats maintain that it is necessary for there to be two majority-minority congressional districts for Black voters to have an opportunity to choose their own representation. They also maintain that that is what the court intended. Sen. Merika Coleman (D-Birmingham) said, “I contend that for African Americans to choose the candidate of their choice that we have to have a majority of African-Americans.” “It is irresponsible for the legislature to do what it is doing,” Coleman said. “The court ordered two districts that have 50% African Americans.” “The three-judge panel said that a proper remedy could consist of two majority-minority districts or quite close to it,” said Rep. Artis “A.J.” McCampbell (D-Livingston). The House of Representatives passed SB5 76 to 26. The Senate, in their own debate on redistricting, then voted 30 to 0 to concur with the House version of SB5 and go to a conference committee. Senate President Pro Tempore Greg Reed (R-Jasper) appointed Sens. Livingston, Smitherman, and Clay Scofield (R-Guntersville) to the conference committee. Speaker of the House Nathaniel Ledbetter (R-Rainsville) appointed Pringle, Chris England (D-Tuscaloosa), and Chris Sells (R-Greenville) to the conference committee. Both Houses of the Legislature will return on Friday afternoon, presumably to vote on the conference committee report. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Legislature to finish redistricting today
On Friday, both Houses of the Alabama Legislature will meet on redistricting. The federal appeals court in Atlanta has set Friday, July 21, as the deadline for the state to submit a new congressional redistricting for the court to consider in the state’s ongoing Voting Rights Act case concerning congressional redistricting. There are a lot of disagreements in the Legislature on what plan the legislators should pass. Legislative Democrats, the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the state, and civil rights groups believe that to comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the state should pass a plan with two majority-minority districts. This would almost certainly mean a pickup of one House of Representatives seat for Democrats in the U.S. Congress as Alabamians overwhelmingly vote along racial lines, with over 90% of Black Alabamians preferring Democrats and over 80% of White Alabamians preferring Republicans in recent elections. Alabama’s Legislative Republicans have rejected calls by Democrats to turn Alabama’s Second Congressional District into a majority-minority district. Congressional District 2 is currently represented by Congressman Barry Moore (R-Enterprise) – who served two terms in the Alabama House of Representatives from 2010 to 2018. Moore is a Republican, a member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, and an ardent Donald Trump supporter. Currently, 30% of the voters of CD2 are Black. State Senator Rodger Smitherman (D-Birmingham) has introduced a plan that would turn Congressional District 2 into a majority-minority district with over 50% of the voters in the district being Black. Republicans rejected that map as well as others introduced by Sen. Bobby Singleton (D-Greensboro) and other Democrats. Republicans maintain that the court has not ruled on Milligan v. Allen that the state is in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Democrats look at the same U.S. Supreme Court ruling and the recent order by a three-judge panel of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals and say that the court did not provide the state with enough guidance to know what an “opportunity district” means. “That could be 42% (Black voters), that could be 38%, we just don’t know,” Senate President Pro Tempore Greg Reed (R-Jasper) told reporters. House Republicans have passed a plan by State Representative Chris Pringle (R-Mobile) they title the community of interest plan where Congressional District 2 is over 42% Black. Pringle maintains that that is close enough racially so that it is winnable by either party. Senate Republicans have passed a competing plan by State Sen. Steve Livingston (R-Scottsboro). The Livingston plan would only raise the Black voting age population of CD2 from 30% Black to 38% Black. Livingston said his plan kept communities of interest together and is the most compact while still providing an opportunity district for Black voters in Congressional District 2. More radical elements in the Legislature had called for turning Alabama’s Seventh Congressional District into an opportunity district that would be potentially winnable by Republicans. Congressional District 7 is represented by Terri Sewell – the only Democrat and the only Black representative in the congressional delegation. Both Pringle and Livingston, while deeply divided on the merits of their respective plans, did not go that far, and Congressional District 7 remains majority Black. Livingston said that his plan kept the Wiregrass whole and in the Second Congressional District, and it keeps the Gulf Coast and Mobile County whole. The House passed Pringle’s plan on Wednesday, but when he brought his bill to the Senate, Livingston motioned to substitute the Pringle plan for the Livingston plan. The Committee passed that motion. Pringle then stormed out of the room without continuing to present his bill. His bill, now the Livingston Bill, was passed by the Committee along party lines, with Democrats voting against it and Republicans voting for it. The one exception was State Senator Andrew Jones (D-Centre). His primary disagreement with the Livingston plan is that a small portion of northwest Etowah County would be in Congressional District 4, while 90% of Etowah County would switch to Congressional District 3. Jones told reporters he did not care whether Congressman Mike Rogers (R-AL03) or Robert Aderholt (R-AL04) represented Etowah County. “My issue is that historically Etowah County has not been divided,” Jones, who represents Etowah and Cherokee Counties, said. Smitherman told reporters that he and Sen. Singleton had brought their own federal lawsuit and joined Milligan and the other plaintiffs. Smitherman said that it is his understanding that the plaintiffs will be given the opportunity to tell the court whether the plan passed by the Legislature satisfies their concerns or not. “Right now, I can’t support either (Republican) plan,” Smitherman said. Smitherman has demanded that the Apportionment Committee prepare a report on the plans showing the likelihood of a Democrat or a Republican winning each of these. “They can get that, or they already know it and don’t want to release it,” Smitherman said, Since the GOP is wildly divided on which plan they will advance to federal court, there is uncertainty about what the Legislature will pass on Friday. “Obviously, there will be negotiations,” Reed said. A compromise plan can be substituted on the floor of either House. Failing that, any difference between the House and Senate plans would be settled by a conference committee. If that happens, then under the circumstances, both Houses will recess until the conference committee returns with a conference committee plan to vote on. If the state and the plaintiffs cannot agree on a redistricting plan that is acceptable to both sides, a trial will likely be held in the eleventh circuit. Whatever is ultimately decided by the federal appeals court in Atlanta will likely be appealed by whichever party is dissatisfied with the outcome meaning that the Milligan case could go back to the Supreme Court, where Justice Brett Kavanaugh appears to be the swing vote. There is even a possibility that this case may not be resolved until after the 2024 elections. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Alabama lawmakers are divided on eve of major redistricting deadline impacting Black voters
On the eve of a court deadline, Alabama lawmakers are still divided Thursday over the map designating new congressional districts and sparred over what constitutes an “opportunity” district that the state was ordered to create for Black voters. Republican-controlled committees in the House of Representatives and Senate continue to advance separate plans that increase the number of Black voters in the state’s 2nd congressional district but fail to establish the second majority-Black district, as sought by plaintiffs who won the Supreme Court case last month. Under the state Senate plan, the number of Black voters in the 2nd congressional district would increase from about 30% to 38%; under the House plan, it would increase to 42%. “We believe it does meet the Voting Rights (Act) standard because we followed all the guidelines. As an opportunity district, nobody knows what the definition of opportunity is. They didn’t give us (a definition),” Sen. Steve Livingston said. The Republican senator from Scottsboro said the chamber settled on 38% of the population of Black voters as adequate to fulfill the court’s directive. “So I’ve got an opportunity to lose,” said Senate Minority Leader Bobby Singleton, a Democrat from Greensboro. Black lawmakers argued those numbers would make it impossible for a Black candidate to win in that district, and do not comply with the court directive to create a second majority-Black district “or something quite close to it.” “There ain’t no way that in that district — that we’re dealing with here in two — that an African-American got a chance to get elected. Ain’t no way whatsoever,” said Democratic Sen. Rodger Smitherman of Birmingham. State lawmakers face a Friday deadline to adopt new lines after the U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld a three-judge panel’s finding that the current state map — with one majority-Black district out of seven in a state that is 27% Black — likely violates the federal Voting Rights Act. State Republicans, who have been reluctant to create a Democratic-leaning district, are engaging in a high-stakes wager that the panel will accept their proposal, arguing that the compact scale of the districts satisfies redistricting principles, or that the state will prevail in a second round of appeals. The panel that issued a preliminary injunction blocking use of the existing map said in 2022 that Alabama should have “either an additional majority-Black congressional district or an additional district in which Black voters otherwise have an opportunity to elect a representative of their choice.” The judges added that any map should include two districts where “Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.” The meaning of the terms “quite close” and “opportunity” has dominated much of the legislative debate. “We’ve got information that’s come from the court. We’ve had information come from the justices, but much of this is speculative as to what they meant,” Senate President Pro Tem Greg Reed, the Republican leader of the Senate, told reporters Thursday. Reed said lawmakers are working toward a compromise between the state House and Senate plans, and that the lawmakers will “absolutely” meet the Friday deadline. Once a new GOP map is approved, the fight will shift quickly back to the courts. A Democratic state senator speculated that Alabama Republicans are seeking another Voting Rights Act challenge before the U.S. Supreme Court. “I think the (Alabama) attorney general is setting up a war with Section 2 (of the Voting Rights Act) so once they get back, they can have a real shot at gutting Section 2. That’s just my gut,” Singleton said. Plaintiffs who won the Supreme Court case have said they will challenge either proposal if enacted. Scott Douglas, executive director of Greater Birmingham Ministries and a plaintiff in the case, said lawmakers have “apparently learned nothing from their loss at the Supreme Court. The Legislature has put forward yet another map that dilutes the electoral power of Black Alabamians.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Alabama Democrats express frustration over redistricting; GOP proposal to get vote Monday
Majority Republican lawmakers have not released their ideas for redrawing Alabama’s congressional districts to comply with a Supreme Court ruling, leading Democrats on Thursday to accuse GOP lawmakers of shutting them, and the public, out of the process ahead of next week’s special session on redistricting. Alabama lawmakers begin the special session Monday to approve a redistricting plan that is being developed by Republicans but hasn’t been presented. “There hasn’t been any public scrutiny on it, and we’re just going to be handed that map at some point over the weekend, maybe even Monday, and say here, ‘Vote on it,’” Rep. Chris England, a Democrat from Tuscaloosa, said after a meeting of the legislature’s redistricting committee. England said he understands that the GOP majority will determine what passes, but said that “something with as much jeopardy attached to it as redrawing the congressional map to satisfy a Supreme Court decision” should be done “in the light of day.” A three-judge panel gave Alabama until July 21 to adopt a new congressional map after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld its ruling that the state likely violated the Voting Rights Act with its current plan that has only one congressional district with a substantial number of Black voters. The Alabama Permanent Legislative Committee on Reapportionment held a meeting Thursday to hear public comments and approve guidelines. House Speaker Pro Tempore Chris Pringle, who serves as co-chairman of the committee, said it will meet Monday to vote on the proposed map. While Democrats accused Republicans of keeping the process shrouded in secrecy, Pringle said they are proceeding as quickly as possible. He said the proposed map will be sent to committee members as soon as possible before the Monday meeting. “We are working on that as fast as we can,” Pringle said. Alabama now has only one majority-Black district out of seven in a state where more than one in four residents are Black. The three-judge panel said in its 2022 ruling that Alabama should have “two districts in which Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.” Republicans have the numbers to approve a plan without support from Democratic lawmakers. However, the plan must go back before the three-judge panel. GOP lawmakers risk the court stepping in and drawing its own plan if lawmakers stray too far from the court’s wishes. The group of Black voters that won the Supreme Court case urged committee members Thursday to adopt their proposed map. It would adjust the state’s 2nd Congressional District, now represented by Republican Rep. Barry Moore, to create what is described as an “opportunity” district because it would give Black voters, now making up 50% of the voting-age population, a greater opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice. The proposed district would encompass some Black Belt counties and parts of Mobile County. Some of the plaintiffs described how they joined the case after seeing their communities ignored by the white Republicans who represent their areas. “I want my community to have a seat at that table,” said Shalela Dowdy of Mobile. Some Democrats on the legislative committee disagreed on how to reconfigure the map. Sen. Vivian Davis Figures, D-Mobile, said she will introduce the plaintiffs’ map in next week’s session because it “complies with the court’s instruction.” Sen. Rodger Smitherman, D-Birmingham, favored a rival proposal that would alter the 6th Congressional District, now represented by Republican Rep. Gary Palmer, so it includes all of Jefferson County, which is home to Birmingham. Smitherman argued that a Democrat would have a good opportunity to be elected in the racially diverse district. “Jefferson County is the melting pot,” he said. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Terri Sewell to commemorate 10th anniversary of landmark Shelby County versus Holder ruling
Congresswoman Terri Sewell will commemorate the 10th anniversary of the landmark Shelby County vs. Holder Supreme Court decision with two events on Tuesday and Wednesday. On June 25, 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that the controversial preclearance section 5 of the Voting Rights Act was archaic and no longer legally enforceable, upsetting many in the civil rights community, including Rep. Sewell. “Exactly 10 years ago, the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in its disastrous Shelby County vs. Holder decision, unleashing a wave of voting restrictions across the nation,” Rep. Sewell said Sunday on Facebook. Sewell is the author and lead sponsor of the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. If passed, the bill would restore the requirement that southern states receive preclearance from the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division before legislatures can pass changes to their voting rules or decennial redistricting. The federal courts have recently found Alabama in violation of the remaining intact provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 with its congressional redistricting in the Allen vs. Milligan decision. Congresswoman Sewell will be joined by retired federal Judge U.W. Clemon, State Senator Rodger Smitherman (D-Birmingham), State Senator Merika Coleman (D-Birmingham), Miles College President Bobbie Knight, Fairfield Mayor Eddie Penny, Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin, and Birmingham Times Executive Editor Barnett Wright for a panel discussion on the Supreme Court’s Allen v. Milligan Decision on Tuesday at Miles College. Sewell will be joined on Wednesday by President & CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights Maya Wiley, former U.S. Senator Doug Jones (D-Alabama), the President & General Counsel of MALDEF Thomas A. Saenz, the Associate Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF) Tona Boyd, Staff Attorney, Native American Rights Fund (NARF) Jacqueline De Leon, Birmingham Civil Rights Institute President & CEO DeJuana Thompson, the executive director of Alabama Forward Evan Milligan, the Co-Founder & Executive Director of Black Voters Matter Cliff Albright, the Vice President of Census & Voting Programs for Asian Americans Advancing Justice (AAJC) Terry A. Minnis, the Co-Director of the Voting Rights Project for Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Marcia Johnson, and the Alabama Policy Director for the Southern Poverty Law Center Jerome Dees. The group will hold a symposium, “Shelby County a Decade Later: The Path Forward in Our Ongoing Fight for the Right to Vote,” at the historic 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham on Wednesday. Sewell is the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Administration Subcommittee on Elections. Sewell is in her seventh term representing Alabama’s Seventh Congressional District. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Controversial anti-vaping legislation carried over in the Alabama Senate
The Alabama Legislature passed dozens of bills on Thursday, with time running out on the 2023 Alabama Regular Legislative Session. Controversial anti-vaping legislation was not one of them. That bill was carried over in the Senate after widespread opposition lobbied Senators not to pass the bill. House Bill 319 (HB319) is sponsored by State Representative Barbara Drummond (D-Mobile). It is being carried in the Alabama Senate by State Senator Garlan Gudger (R-Cullman). Sen. Gudger said, “We do have a few amendments.” State Senator Tim Melson (R-Florence) said the Alabama Cancer Action Network opposed the bill. “This isn’t a quack organization,” Melson said. “They and the Heart Association and the lung people are against this bill.” Gudger said, “They want all tobacco and nicotine in existence eliminated.” “I don’t know how you are going to move it,” Melson said. “I can’t support this if they are against it.” Sen. Rodger Smitherman (D-Birmingham) said, “I think it is a crying shame that instead of doing something, they would rather do nothing. Doing nothing here is going to continue to allow these kids to continue vaping.” “They are going to continue vaping like I don’t know what,” Smitherman said. “They want to yank us around like a yoyo. Look at the impact if you don’t do anything.” Smitherman compared the Senator’s unwillingness to pass health legislation not supported by health associations to the failure of his plan to require a formal due process for school discipline decisions because it was universally opposed by the Alabama state school superintendents. “You care more about these little folks that call you, like the superintendents, than you do the little children,” Smitherman said. Smitherman said that Drummond had a negotiated bill. “She negotiated with them, and they agreed with what that bill was,” Smitherman said. “That’s not right.” “I am not going to stop fighting for the kids,” Smitherman said. “If you don’t pass this bill, they are going to vape for a whole year.” HB319 creates a registry of vape sellers. The Alcohol and Beverage Control Board would run the registry and enforce the bill. It also limits vaping to people 21 and above and fines underage people who vape. “For the sake of the children, take out the due process,” Smitherman told Gudger. Sen. Shay Shelnut (R-Trussville) told Gudger to “carry this over at the call of the chair.” Gudger finally asked that the bill be carried over at the call of the chair. It never came back that day. Gudger later told reporters, “(Health groups) want all tobacco eliminated, and we can’t do that. They want their way or nothing.” Groups like the Alabama Heart Association have opposed this legislation because they object to people who vape being fined by the state and claim that it does not go far enough in regulating tobacco companies. Jada Shaffer is the senior regional lead of governmental affairs for the American Heart Association. “As the mother of a son who started using chewing tobacco at 14 and purchased it at our local gas station, I know this is a problem all too well,” said Shaffer. “I am pleading with lawmakers to take bold steps in ensuring that no child is exposed again to these deadly products and that the retailers in Alabama are held accountable if they sell to minors. Big tobacco targeted kids with fruity flavors and successfully addicted a whole new generation of kids to nicotine. And now they are shifting the blame to kids and penalizing them. HB319/SB271 further victimizes Alabama’s children all over again.” House Bill 319 could be brought back when the Legislature meets for its last day of the session on Tuesday. The legislation would have to be approved by the Senate – and then the House of Representatives would have to vote to accept any changes made by the Senate for it to reach the Governor’s desk. Any legislation not on the Governor’s desk by the close of the legislative day on Tuesday will have to be brought back next year as the regular session will end. The legislature is limited to a maximum of thirty days by the Alabama Constitution. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Lawmakers vote to shield release of their personal information
Alabama lawmakers voted Thursday to include themselves in legislation that would allow judges, law enforcement, and prosecutors to shield personal information from being released on public records, such as a home address, phone number, or driver’s license number. The Alabama Senate approved the House-passed bill that would allow law enforcement officials to request that their personal identifying information be redacted from public documents. But senators approved an amendment to add legislators to the list of occupations that could request that their information be shielded from public view. The bill has now gone to Gov. Kay Ivey. Measures to shield the release of personal information of judges, police officers, and others have been introduced in multiple states following threats and attacks on public officials, including the 2020 fatal shooting of a federal judge’s son in New Jersey. But the measures add additional secrecy and have sometimes drawn criticism for potentially blocking information that could reveal conflicts of interest. Sen. Rodger Smitherman, D-Birmingham, offered the amendment to include lawmakers. The change was approved in the Senate and House of Representatives without debate. Smitherman said in an interview that lawmakers have the same safety concerns as those in law enforcement. “We make a ruling on a controversial issue, and you have some overzealous people who have a set opinion about it and want to express it in an unsafe manner,” Smitherman said. “That’s why we have security” at the Statehouse. In 2021, the home of Sen. Vivian Davis Figures was shot into multiple times. The bill states that state and local agencies and departments shall make a request form available “that allows a state legislator or law enforcement officer or employee to request the redaction of personal identifying information from the records of the department or agency.” Felicia Mason, executive director of the Alabama Press Association, said Friday that the measure “would seem to be in conflict” with the information required on state ethics forms. Alabama lawmakers and other public officials are currently required to file annual financial disclosure forms with the Alabama Ethics Commission. The bill was introduced to combat the “doxing” of law enforcement officers and court officials, where information is gathered about them and posted online in an attempt to harass, threaten, shame, or exact revenge. Doxing is a shortened version of “dropping dox” or documents. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Controversial anti-vaping legislation carried over in the Alabama Senate
The Alabama Legislature passed dozens of bills on Thursday, with time running out on the 2023 Alabama Regular Legislative Session. Controversial anti-vaping legislation was not one of them. That bill was carried over in the Senate after widespread opposition lobbied Senators not to pass the bill. House Bill 319 (HB319) is sponsored by State Representative Barbara Drummond (D-Mobile). It is being carried in the Alabama Senate by State Senator Garlan Gudger (R-Cullman). Sen. Gudger said, “We do have a few amendments.” State Senator Tim Melson (R-Florence) said that the Alabama Cancer Action Network is opposing this bill. “This isn’t a quack organization,” Melson said. “They and the heart association and the lung people are against this bill.” Gudger said, “They want all tobacco and nicotine in existence eliminated.” “I don’t know how you are going to move it,” Melson said. “I can’t support this if they are against it.” Sen. Rodger Smitherman (D-Birmingham) said, “I think it is a crying shame that instead of doing something, they would rather do nothing. Doing nothing here is going to continue to allow these kids to continue vaping.” “They are going to continue vaping like I don’t know what,” Smitherman said. “They want to yank us around like a yoyo. Look at the impact if you don’t do anything.” Smitherman compared the Senator’s unwillingness to pass health legislation not supported by health associations to the failure of his plan to require a formal due process for school discipline decisions because it was universally opposed by the Alabama state school superintendents. “You care more about these little folks that call you, like the superintendents, than you do the little children,” Smitherman said. Smitherman said that Drummond had a negotiated bill. “She negotiated with them, and they agreed with what that bill was,” Smitherman said. “That’s not right.” “I am not going to stop fighting for the kids,” Smitherman said. “If you don’t pass this bill, they are going to vape for a whole year.” HB319 creates a registry of vape sellers and assigns that and enforcement of the bill to the Alcohol and Beverage Control Board. It also limits vaping to people 21 and above and fines underage persons who vape. “For the sake of the children, take out the due process,” Smitherman told Gudger. Sen. Shay Shelnutt (R-Trussville) told Gudger to “carry this over at the call of the chair.” Gudger finally asked that the bill be carried over at the call of the chair. It never came back that day. Gudger later told reporters, “(Health groups) want all tobacco eliminated, and we can’t do that. They want their way or nothing.” Groups like the Alabama Heart Association have opposed this legislation because they object to young people who vape being fined by the state and claim that it does not go far enough in regulating tobacco companies. Jada Shaffer is the senior regional lead of governmental affairs for the American Heart Association. “As the mother of a son who started using chewing tobacco at 14 and purchased it at our local gas station, I know this is a problem all too well,” said Shaffer. “I am pleading with lawmakers to take bold steps in ensuring that no child is exposed again to these deadly products and that the retailers in Alabama are held accountable if they sell to minors. Big tobacco targeted kids with fruity flavors and successfully addicted a whole new generation of kids to nicotine. And now they are shifting the blame to kids and penalizing them. HB319/SB271 further victimizes Alabama’s children all over again.” House Bill 319 could be brought back on Tuesday. If it does not pass the Senate – and then the House of Representatives approves any changes made by the Senate by the end of the legislative day on Tuesday, the legislation will die as Tuesday is Day 30 of the legislative session – the legislature is limited to a maximum of thirty days by the Alabama Constitution. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Controversial gambling bill causes issues in closing hours of legislative session
Thursday is the 29th day of the 2023 Alabama Regular Legislative Session, and the Alabama Constitution limits the legislative session to just 30 legislative days. The Senate has an ambitious 27-bill special order calendar to address today, as well as remaining local bills and senate confirmations. All of this was delayed this morning because some Senate Democrats are filibustering confirmations and local bills to keep the Senate from adopting Thursday’s special order calendar. Two issues were responsible for slowing the legislative process, potentially killing dozens of bills before time runs out on the session. State Senator Rodger Smitherman (D-Birmingham) said he is filibustering a controversial provision in the grocery tax cut bill. That provision would prevent a county or municipality that elects to cut its own sales tax on groceries to then come back later and raise the grocery taxes. The legislation, as written, cuts the state sales tax on groceries but does not cut the county, city, or school district sales taxes on groceries. The legislation does, however, bar them from raising the tax on groceries from this point forward. Even if a city council or county commission cuts the tax, they then can’t restore it. Smitherman said that this potentially could “bankrupt my cities.” Sources have told Alabama Today that the second issue is the status of illegal gambling in Greene County. Greene County has legal dog racing and charity bingo, but Greene County dog track, Greenetrack, was not satisfied with that. Because of that, they began offering electronic bingo machines instead of charity bingo. The Alabama Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that bingo, under Alabama law, is a game played on paper cards. Therefore the gambling machines at Greenetrack are illegal and should be shut down. Greenetrack has also been found guilty of not paying income taxes. Greenetrack argued unsuccessfully that they are a nonprofit corporation and never owed any income taxes. Last week the Alabama Senate passed a controversial constitutional amendment that would allow Greenetrack and potentially other facilities in Greene County to operate historical horse racing machines where players play a machine that shows a previously raced horse race on an electronic video machine. Senate Bill 324 (SB324) is sponsored by State Senate Minority Leader Bobby Singleton (D-Greensboro). “This is a constitutional amendment,” Singleton said when the bill was in committee. “By rule 50, this has to be approved in both the Local Legislation Committee and the Tourism Committee. This has to do with “Racing and Parimutuel for Greene County.” “The Greene County Racing Commission asked me to carry this bill,” Singleton said. This will “add in historical horse racing at one or more tracks in the county.” “This bill has nothing to do with bingo in the county at all,” Singleton told the committee. The Senate Tourism Committee voted to give the bill a favorable report in a 12 to 0 vote, and 24 Senators voted to pass the bill out of the Senate. The House committee did not meet this week to address the legislation. Sources say that gambling proponents want the House Committee to meet in an emergency committee meeting and advance the legislation so that it could be brought to the House floor for a vote before this session ends. To this point, the Legislature has avoided taking up the divisive issue of gambling, which has wasted hours and hours in previous legislative sessions. A source close to the House of Representatives told Alabama Today, “They are not going to advance that legislation.” Sen. Greg Albritton (R-Atmore) said, “It would sure be nice if we could get that same vote on a much bigger type of gambling bill.” As of this morning, Thursday’s special order calendar has been adopted, and legislation is moving. What concessions, if any, have been granted to the minority is unknown at this time. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Alabama Senate Committee advances mandatory kindergarten bill
On Wednesday, the Alabama Senate Education Policy Committee advanced legislation requiring every Alabama six-year-old to either have completed kindergarten or pass a competency test to enter first grade. Children who fail the test will be forced to attend kindergarten rather than first grade with their peers. House Bill 43 (HB43) is sponsored by State Representative Pebblin Warren (D-Tuskegee), who has carried this legislation for the last few years. “This issue has become a really important issue in the State of Alabama,” Warren said. “It is a tragedy that we would let a child reach third grade without being able to read competently.” This is the fourth year that Warren carried similar legislation. It has not passed the Senate in the past. Governor Kay Ivey endorsed the bill in her State of the State speech. “A child can attend kindergarten or maybe in homeschooling, private schooling, or religious schooling,” Warren explained. “As long as they demonstrate competence, they can enter into first grade.” Sen. Rodger Smitherman (D-Birmingham) asked how much this would cost in the fiscal note. “$8.4 million,” Warren answered. “We are just preparing them to fail,” Smitherman said. “Requiring those little children to pass this without doing any of that is setting up these kids to fail. We know that the resources are not there .” Sen. Jay Hovey (R-Auburn) said, “I would prefer this as an opportunity to identify needs and opportunities to avoid problems later on. I would rather catch it now in kindergarten and first grade than third and fourth grade. Hovey said, “It is easier and less disruptive to fail them then than it would be in third, fourth, or fifth grade.” Smitherman said, “We haven’t provided nothing for them. You think it is alright to flunk them if they are six years old?” “I hope there is a way we can facilitate that tutoring,” Hovey said. “I hope that we can find a way to raise them up.” “How are they going to get where you want them to get without giving them any money or structure?” Smitherman said. “I am hurt that we are even considering this.” Warren said, “This is already being enacted by the state school board.” Sen. Donnie Chesteen (R-Dothan) said, “We have some questions that need to be answered. Rep. Warren.” Chesteen is the Chairman of the Senate Education Policy Committee. Sen. Kirk Hatcher (D-Montgomery) said, “My professional worth is as an educator. I am the Director of Montgomery Head Start. I would almost rather disagree with God than disagree with my mentor Senator Smitherman.” Hatcher said that if a child is six years old and doesn’t know their numbers, colors, or ABCs and can’t write their name, “they are woefully behind.” Hatcher said that if a child cannot read by the third grade, “They drop off rapidly. The numbers are startling.” “Money needs to be put in the kindergarten program,” Hatcher said, “We have got to do something.” Hatcher said that he favored funding an “at-risk program.” “I am on the side of mandating kindergarten,” Hatcher said. The Committee then entertained a motion to give HB43 a favorable report. Smitherman said, “No, with every fiber of our being.” The motion carried, and the Committee voted to advance the legislation to the full Senate. Warren said, “Thank you, and on behalf of the children of Alabama, I say thank you.” Chesteen said, “Rep. Warren, get with Sen. Smitherman before it gets to the floor (of the Senate).” The full Senate could consider HB43 as soon as Thursday. The House previously voted to pass HB43 in a vote of 87 to 12. Thursday will be day 26 of the 2023 Alabama Regular Legislative Session. The Alabama Constitution of 1901 limits the legislature to no more than 30 legislative days in the regular session. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Alabama Senate passes bill to raise cap on the Alabama Accountability Act
On Tuesday, the Alabama Senate voted to raise the cap on the money that can go to the Alabama Accountability Act (AAA). The Alabama Accountability Act was passed in 2013 to allow parents whose children are zoned to Alabama’s worst-performing schools to choose to apply for a scholarship to go to another public school or a private school. That act is currently capped at $30 million. This legislation would raise it to $40 million next year, and if specific targets are reached in coming years, that could increase to $50 million. Potentially the cap could increase to $60 million over six years. Senate Bill 263 (SB263) is sponsored by State Senator Donnie Chesteen (R-Dothan). SB263 also raises the number of Alabama students who qualify for scholarships to 250 percent of the poverty line. That would be slightly higher than the median income in Alabama. Under the existing rules, only students zoned to the worst six percent of schools can qualify for scholarships to go to a private school or another public school. The legislation would also rename those failing schools as priority schools. Chesteen said that in the old bill, students from just 79 failing schools can apply for the scholarships. This would open it up to students from a school with a D or an F on its report card – 212 schools. SB263 would open up to 25% of the scholarships for students who live outside of those targeted D and F scoring schools if they meet the poverty thresholds. Sen. Bobby Singleton (D-Greensboro) said, “I think this bill takes care of the middle up. It does not help those in the bottom.” “It is not easy to satisfy all the components of all the people involved, and it is not easy to get through the process to get here today; nevertheless, I do not support this bill,” Singleton said. Singleton said that expansion of the AAA would only hurt public schools. “I think this is going to hurt public education,” Singleton said. “I am here to protect those to whom I see that unintended consequences are happening. “Our charter schools, they can take a limited number of students, our private schools, they can take a limited number of students,” Singleton said. “If students leave school B for school A, what they are going to do is leave school B with nobody. If that was a bad school, you just left it worse.” The SGOs have had difficulty over the past year in raising the $30 million to utilize the cap. “If we have not met the cap, why are we bumping it up?” Singleton said. “25% can go anywhere.” “If they meet the threshold,” Chesteen said. “That bothers me,” Singleton said. “They may not qualify at one level, but can roam around the system if they are in poverty.” Sen. Larry Stutts (R-Sheffield) argued against the bill because he felt it did not go far enough. “We have been in last place too long,” Stutts said. “It is important that we make a statement that education is important. It is important for the workforce. It is important to parents.” Stutts is the sponsor of the PRICE Act, which would be a far larger, more expansive school choice bill. “Your bill (the AAA) has only helped 3,200 students in ten years. My bill would help 7,900 students the first year,” Stutts argued. The money for the Accountability Act comes from Alabama taxpayers voluntarily electing to take tax credits so that their income tax dollars go to scholarship granting organizations (SGOs) instead of the Alabama education trust fund. The PRICE Act, on the other hand, would transfer $6,900 per student from the education trust fund to an education savings account that would follow the child to the school of the parent’s choice. “We need universal school choice,” Stutts said. “We need choice throughout the state. The parents know the needs of the children. No one understands the individual needs of the child better than the parents.” Stutts also objected to the fact that the students can get a scholarship up to $10,000 under this bill, while the amount the student would receive under the PRICE Act – would be just $6,900 – the amount of state support that Alabama public schools students receive from the education trust fund on a per capita basis. “Are you willing to say that we carry over your bill tonight and commit to me that we will tie these two bills together and pass these two bills out of the Senate together?” Stutts asked. Chesteen answered, “My plan is to move this bill tonight. I am going to continue to work this bill. If you will continue to work your bill, I will commit to you that I will work with you to get your bill passed tomorrow.” Stutts said, “I appreciate your bill, but I appreciate my bill more.” Singleton warned that expanding school choice could lead to a mass exodus of students from public schools. “You might think that not everybody is going to get up and run, but it might happen,” Singleton said. “It doesn’t say that the child has to fail, just that the school has to fail. They can recruit this star athlete who has a 3.9 to go over here because the school is failing. Usually, when one child leaves, it is the whole family that leaves.” Sen. Garlan Gudger (R-Cullman) said there are no failing schools in his district, so no one in his district qualifies for the scholarships. “They told me back in my district that they are not opposed to school choice, but since no one from the district gets the money, and it takes $30 million out of the education trust fund to oppose this,” Gudger said. “It is hard for me to go back to rural Alabama when the money goes to people in other parts of the state.” Sen. Rodger Smitherman (D-Birmingham) said that more money is going for school choice than raising up the state’s failing schools. “I am up here
Alabama Senate passes anti ESG legislation
On Thursday, the Alabama Senate passed legislation that would require companies that want state of Alabama contracts to forgo any ESG (environmental, social, and governance) woke corporations or ESGs. Senate Bill 261 (SB261) is sponsored by State Senator Dan Roberts. Senate Bill 261 has been billed as the “strongest” anti-ESG legislation in the nation. The bill prohibits governmental entities from entering into certain contracts with companies that boycott businesses because the business engages in certain sectors, does not meet certain environmental or corporate governance standards, or does not facilitate certain activities. The legislation authorizes the Attorney General to take action to investigate and enforce this act. “I appreciate the support of my colleagues in the Senate for working to pass this legislation,” Sen. Roberts told reporters. “The Alabama Senate has made it clear that we want businesses to focus on growing and expanding and not working to push any political agenda with left-wing ESG policies.” If a company engages in social activism banned by the legislation, it can’t do business with any local or state government. According to the bill, “This bill would prohibit a governmental entity from entering into a public contract for goods or services with certain companies or businesses that engage in the economic boycott of businesses in certain sectors and industries; that fail to meet or commit to meet certain environmental standards; that fail to meet or commit to meet certain corporate governance criteria; or that fail to facilitate certain activities.” Companies would have to sign a verification that it does not engage in boycotts of other companies and industries. Governments can opt out of this provision if they can prove that it would have an adverse economic effect on that government if they can’t do business with that company. The bill states, “The Attorney General shall seek to prohibit the adoption of federal laws, rules, regulations, bulletins, executive orders, or other federal actions that may penalize, inflict economic harm on, limit commercial relations with, or change or limit the activities of a company in the state or a resident of the state based on the furtherance of economic boycott criteria or other similarly oriented rating.” It also protects companies from state or local governments trying to pressure them company into adopting woke political action. “No company in this state shall be penalized, have economic harm inflicted on it, have commercial relations limited, or have the activities of the company changed or limited by a governmental entity because the company will not engage in economic boycotts; will not establish or implement policies, procedures, guidelines, rules, reports, products, services, notices, disclosures, or rates or pricing; will not provide or submit answers to surveys or other information requests or disclosures; will not invest in or divest of certain securities, stocks, bonds, bills, partnerships, or other investment arrangements; or will not initiate other corporate or business practices that further social, political, or ideological interests including, but not limited to, economic boycott criteria or other similarly oriented rating.” Sen. Rodger Smitherman said that the bill was unconstitutional. “I am trying to save you from yourselves,” Smitherman said. “You either don’t know the Constitution or don’t understand the Constitution.” “If you say that they don’t have free expression, you are going to lose,” Smitherman said. “I have been a constitutional law professor for 25 years. Doing something that is unconstitutional just because it feels good does not make sense.” “We have industry in our state that can be hurt by things going on nationally,” Roberts explained. “We are trying to put them in position so they can thrive. We are trying to make sure that they have access to the mother’s milk of capital in the future.” Sen. Bobby Singleton brought an amendment to the committee substitute of the bill. “It was given to me by the governor’s office,” Singleton said. “The finance department; they just wanted to make sure that they are protected in dealing with the state’s debt obligations.” Roberts accepted the Singleton amendment as friendly. “I think this is an anti-business bill,” Singleton said. “You are telling people that do business in the state of Alabama that you can’t have a social conscience.” “This is not a pro-business bill,” Singleton said. “Dan, you are wrong on this one. I will tell you, Dan, that you are wrong on this one.” “You can’t listen to Fox and decide what you are going to do,” Singleton continued. “We can’t be Florida 2.0. We won’t be able to recruit with this on the ground. This is a threat to business. If I don’t sign this paragraph, I can’t do business in Alabama.” Senate President Pro Tempore Greg Reed said, “This is a difficult topic. This is one that is at a national level that we have to deal with.” Roberts left after he learned that his friend, Pastor Harry Reeder, had died driving home from a meeting with Roberts and legislators. Sen. Sam Givhan then assumed the role of advocating for the bill. “We did have great dialogue,” Givhan said of talks with the Alabama business community on the bill. “We had businesses across the gamut in the state of Alabama. We sat down in a room with them, and they presented us with their redlines.” “They are never going to tell you no because they feel vulnerable,” Singleton said. “They know you can pass it anyway.” “They probably walk out of the room and cuss you out once they are out of the room,” Singleton said. “I am sure if they had their way, it would just go away.” Sen Robert Stewart said, “Corporations do have an obligation to be good actors.” Givhan responded, “Their job is to maximize shareholder wealth.” “Why are we trying to tell businesses what they can and can’t do even businesses we do not give incentives,” Smitherman said, “How do we make these God-like decisions? Just because we have authority does not mean that we are God.” Givhan explained the Singleton amendment. “Debt obligations – that is targeted at the bond market,” Givhan said. “There is not
