State Senate approves bill prohibiting additional fees, hurdles for gun buyers
The Alabama Senate Thursday approved a bill from Sen. Phil Williams (R-Rainbow City), SB135, which will prohibit local governments from applying additional fees and “regulatory hurdles” to gun permits and purchases. Such tactics are often used to make purchasing a weapon or obtaining a permit more difficult. In his explanation of the bill, Williams noted that other cities have required prospective gun owners to submit essays, pay additional fees or possess a high school diploma. Williams specifically noted Seattle, which passed a $25 per gun tax and a 2- to 5-cent tax on every round of ammunition. “My legislation is designed to protect Alabama’s citizens from rogue action at the county and municipal level to push a liberal, anti-gun agenda by imposing local fees and obstacles,” Williams said in a news release. The legislation now moves to the House of Representatives, where it will likely be taken up next week. Senators also passed a slew of Sunshine Law bills today and confirmed a number of people to positions throughout the state, including Cliff Walker to the Pardons and Parole Board, Frank Ellis and Charles Price to the State Ethics Commission and several people to the Jacksonville State Univeristy and University of North Alabama Boards of Trustees. The Senate will reconvene Tuesday at 2 p.m.
Alabama Senate committee discusses several bills, 2 headed to public hearings
The Alabama Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs held a meeting Tuesday where a variety of bills were discussed, including two designated for public hearings. Sen. Gerald Dial (R-Auburn) brought forth SB80 for discussion, a bill that vets candidates before being added to regulatory boards, which was given a unanimously favorable report. Sen. Phil Williams (R-Rainbow City) garnered a favorable report for SB135, which prohibits the institution of additional fees in regard to the purchase of weapons, ammunition or the relevant permits. A bill by Sen. Vivian Figures (R-Mobile), SB133, which alters the composition of the Historical Commission to include an appointee from the Alabama Black Heritage Council, also gained a favorable report after an amendment was added to include an appointee from a North Alabama university. Additional bills also gained a favorable report from the commission, including SB54, which extends the terms of Trails Commission board members, SB141, which allows state employees to stay on-board with their respective departments in order to train replacements, and SB73, which increases the allowance for registrars. The increase in allowance would cost the state $390,000 this year and $1.6 million thereafter. The main action of today’s agenda centered around two bills, one from Sen. Lee Pittman (R-Birmingham) and another from Sen. Gerald Allen (R-Tuscaloosa). Pittman’s bill, SB119, would reduce Alabama’s Legislature to one chamber, saving the state an estimated $8 million or more. Pittman noted that Nebraska has been a unicameral Legislature since the 1930s and that such a move would add transparency to the process and ensure that more can be accomplished. Objections to Pittman’s legislation were numerous. Legislators voiced concerns over the perceived lack of checks and balances, the lack of adequate debate and discussion and apprehension over eliminating the structure established by the Founding Fathers. Pittman’s bill was meant to have public input, but no one was in attendance to provide such input. A vote on the bill was delayed. Allen’s bill would establish the Alabama Heritage Preservation Act which would, at its core, outlaw the removal of historical monuments. It would also put in place a strenuous appeals process for entities looking to remove such monuments. Mike Williams, a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, spoke first in favor of Allen’s legislation. “Don’t disgrace my grandfathers by allowing political correctness to come into this state,” Williams said. “It starts and it snowballs. We don’t want to offend anybody but we can’t erase history as it is.” Kevin Mount, who noted he was representing himself, referenced an unconfirmed speech from a black Confederate soldier who spoke before the Mississippi Legislature in 1890 to support legislation to honor Confederate veterans. “Today this is about Confederate history and we all know that because that’s what under assault right now,” Mount said. “But that’s not where it’s going to stop.” “Confederate history should not be a black-white issues. People from outside of this state have turned it into a black-white issue.” The Rev. Rayford Mack, with the NAACP, spoke last and started by condemning Mound for his comments and noted that cities and counties should be able to make decisions regarding the monuments in their cities and the desires of those cities’ constituents. Voting on Allen’s bill was delayed so public input could be finished on Tuesday.
Kenneth Paschal: Government needs to stop hurting Alabama families
Parental rights in Alabama are under assault. These fundamental rights are consistently treated as “ordinary” by federal and state government, which essentially provides government with unlimited power to undermine the family unit. We all know laws and the court system are intended to protect citizens, but when it comes to families, husbands and wives, and fathers and mothers, laws and their enforcers can sometimes become harmful instigators. This harms children, parents, families and society. Power over the family unit is best placed in the hands of the parents not government. In 2011, Senate Joint Resolution 65 (SJR 65) was approved by the Alabama legislature, which requires proper proof of harm before the government will intervene in parental decision-making. (As acknowledged by the U.S. Supreme Court in Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), that held, “The primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition.”) The signing of SJR 65 sent a strong message to Washington. The state of Alabama acknowledged the fundamental right (God-given) of parents (meaning, granted by God and cannot be take away without compelling reason) to direct the upbringing and education of their children, is protected by the Alabama and U.S. constitutions. The Alabama Supreme Court has declared parental rights are fundamental in prior rulings; however, the Legislature has never before defined the level of protection granted to parents. I am appreciative of our Legislature and governor for publicly announcing to citizens a defined standard in SJR 65, “the right of the parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution of the United States and the state of Alabama”. Because SJR 65 is not codified in Alabama statutes, the result of such failure to “Secure Parents’ Fundamental Rights” is allowing the courts and other state agencies to routinely over-reach their responsibilities. Examples include a court order stating parents are not allowed to have a glass of wine during dinner; parents not allowed to send their children to church on Wednesdays; discontinuation of homeschooling of a teenager based on an argument that he needed more diversity; a 14-year-old is not required to share health information with his or her parents. This is why Senate Bill 135 and House Bill 213 were filed this year and why they are so important to Alabama’s families. They would protect parents’ fundamental rights (God-given) in Alabama. We need to strongly urge our Legislature to increase the protections of family values by declaring in this State, what they have already declared to the U.S. Congress, any political subdivision of the state, or any other governmental entity or institution shall not infringe upon the fundamental rights of fit parent’s to direct the upbringing, education, and physical and mental health of his or her minor child subject to strict scrutiny without demonstrating a compelling governmental interest, as applied to the child involved, is of the highest order, and the same is narrowly tailored in the less restrictive manner. SB 135 and HB 213 have seen opposition from the divorce industry and Alabama Association of School Boards. SB 135 is assigned to the Human and Health Services committee and chaired by Sen. Gerald Dial, a Republican and a Baptist. HB 213 is assigned to the House judiciary committee and chaired by Rep. Mike Jones, a Republican, family law attorney, and a deacon of his church. Both bills have seen support from across the state and country to include the Homeschool community and the Alabama Federation of Republican Women (AFRW). AFRW passed a resolution in support of Parental Rights in Alabama during its Legislative Days event April 1 and 2. Citizens of Alabama have requested weekly that Dial and Jones place these bills onto their committee agenda. The Alabama citizens’ requests so far seems to fall on deaf ears. I encourage everyone reading this to write and call their members as well as committee chairmen Dial and Jones to ask them to support these bills and bring them up before the session comes to an end. Retired Army 1st Sgt. Kenneth Paschal is the director of governmental affairs of the Alabama Family Rights Association. Information on the organization and its efforts can be found here.
