Alabama Ten Year Road and Bridge Construction Program, Amendment 3 (2010)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 16:31, 14 August 2012 by JWilliams (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Alabama Constitution
Seal of Alabama.png
Preamble
Articles
IIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIIIIXXXIXIIXIIIXIVXVXVIXVIIXVIII
Amendments
The Alabama Ten Year Road and Bridge Construction Program, also known as Amendment 3, was on the November 2, 2010 ballot in the state of Alabama as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was defeated.Defeatedd The proposed measure called for a ten year road and bridge construction program to be funded by appropriations from the Alabama Trust Fund, which would have totaled out to be $100 million per year. The proposal was sponsored by State Senator Lowell Barron, who introduced the measure to improve transportation and create new jobs in the state.[1][2]

Election results

See also: 2010 ballot measure election results

Official results follow:

Amendment 3 (Road and Bridge Construction)
ResultVotesPercentage
Defeatedd No702,34057%
Yes 530,017 43%

Results via the Alabama Secretary of State

Text of measure

Ballot text

According to the legislation, the ballot text read as follows:[3]

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.

Support

Supporters

Arguments

  • 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."[4]
  • 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."[5]

Opposition

Opponents

  • 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."[6]
  • 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."[7]

Arguments

  • 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."[6]

Media endorsements

See also: Endorsements of Alabama ballot measures, 2010

Support

  • 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."[8]

Opposition

  • 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!"[9]
  • 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."[10]
  • 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."[11]

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.[12]

See also

BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
Suggest a link

External links

Additional reading

References