Alabama Ten Year Road and Bridge Construction Program, Amendment 3 (2010)
|I • II • III • IV • V • VI • VII • VIII • IX • X • XI •XII •XIII •XIV • XV • XVI • XVII • XVIII|
- See also: 2010 ballot measure election results
Official results follow:
|Amendment 3 (Road and Bridge Construction)|
Results via the Alabama Secretary of State
Text of measure
According to the legislation, the ballot text read as follows:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, relating to the Alabama Trust Fund, to provide for the appropriation of funds in the Alabama Trust Fund to be distributed for state and local transportation purposes and to provide for funds for the County and Municipal Government Capital Improvement Fund.
- The Alabama Jobs Coalition was the main campaign for Amendment 3.
- Partners of the coalition can be found here.
- Executive Director of the Alabama Road Builders Association Billy Norrell argued, "At a time when raising taxes is not an option when borrowing only increases debts, this is the best plan that could be formulated under the circumstances."
- According to the Alabama Jobs Coalition's website, "A 2007 analysis by the Federal Highway Administration found that every $1 billion invested in highway construction would support approximately 27,800 jobs, including approximately 9,500 in the construction sector, approximately 4,300 jobs in industries supporting the construction sector, and approximately 14,000 other jobs induced in non-construction related sectors of the economy."
- David Bronner, head of the Retirement Systems of Alabama opposed the measure. Bronner stated that it was too late to take up such a project. According to Bronner, "Amendment No. 3 lets politicians spend $100 million a year for 10 years across the state. Everyone gets what? A few loads of cement, asphalt or gravel, and no major results."
- J.D. Crowe of The Press-Register stated in a column about the measure, "...the measure wouldn't provide enough jobs or improve enough roads to make it worth borrowing $100 million a year for 10 years from the Alabama Trust Fund. That's why Alabamians should vote "no" on this amendment."
- Bronner argued, "Taking $100 million each year from our savings account for 10 years does not create jobs fast enough, but hurts every function of state government, from the Health Department, to the Department of Corrections, to Public Safety."
- According to the DeKalb County Times-Journal, the measure deserved support, and should have been approved. In an editorial, the publication stated, "As the days to the November election grow shorter and shorter, voters face more and more critical issues and it is up to them to learn more about the people and questions that was on the ballot. Amendment Three is a good example of the state developing creative ways to move the economy forward without placing the burden on the taxpayers."
- WTVM.com stated its opposition to the measure, stating, "Legislators want to dip further into a trust fund that has already shrunk have a billion dollars from a few years ago. Don't let them take more away!"
- The Birmingham News published an editorial on October 27, 2010 saying that each amendment on the ballot should be rejected by voters. The editorial by the publication stated, "This year, there is no compelling amendment requiring a "yes" vote. Instead, the four statewide and 33 local amendments on the ballot remind us of the 1901 constitution's biggest flaw. The lack of self-government, or home rule, hamstrings local governments. Blame the constitution's drafters, who didn't trust the people or local governments. That forces county commissions and city councils to seek the Legislature's blessing on amendments that let them do what the constitution prohibits."
- The Press Register was against the measure, stating, "The amendment, which is on Tuesday’s ballot, would raid the Alabama Trust Fund for more than $1 billion over the next 10 years. Voters should say “no” to this porcine proposition."
Path to the ballot
According to Article XVIII of the Alabama Constitution, it takes a three-fifths (60%) vote of the Alabama State Legislature to qualify an amendment for the ballot. The measure was approved by the state legislature and referred to the Alabama Secretary of State for placement on the November 2 general election ballot on April 22, 2010.
- Alabama Secretary of State: 2010 Election Information
- SB121 full text
- Alabama Amendment 3: Support and Opposition
- ↑ Alabama Legislature,"Final Report on the 2010 Regular Session (go to page 7)," retrieved August 9, 2010
- ↑ Alabama Secretary of State, "Certification of Proposed Constitutional Amendments", Retrieved September 2, 2010
- ↑ Alabama Legislature,"SB121 full text," retrieved August 9, 2010
- ↑ WKRG.com, "Amendment 3 Supporters Begin Pushing Passage", October 14, 2010
- ↑ Alabama Jobs Coalition, "Why vote yes", Retrieved October 18, 2010
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 The Birmingham News, "Alabama pension boss David Bronner opposes Amendment 3", October 21, 2010
- ↑ The Press-Register, "Amendment 3", October 26, 2010
- ↑ Times-Journal, "Amendment Three Deserves Support", September 21, 2010
- ↑ WTVM.com, "Editorial: Alabama Amendment 3", Retrieved October 25, 2010
- ↑ Birmingham News, "OUR VIEW: The News recommends voting no on proposed constitutional amendments in an effort to force a new Alabama Constitution", October 27, 2010
- ↑ Al.com, "Editorial: Say 'no' to phony jobs amendment", October 31, 2010
- ↑ Alabama State Legislature,"History for SB121," retrieved August 9, 2010
State of Alabama
|State executive officers||
Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Treasurer| Auditor| Superintendent of Education| Commissioner of Insurance| Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries| Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries| Commissioner of Labor| Public Service Commission|
Public Records Law | Transparency Checklist | Government corruption reports | Transparency Legislation | Open Records procedures | Transparency Advocates | Transparency blogs | State budget | Taxpayer-funded lobbying associations |