The Constitutional Amendment that would have permanently

removed racist, “Jim Crow,” language from the Alabama Constitution was defeated during Tuesday’s election.

The act, known as Amendment Two, was ratified by the House and the Senate in 2003.

A vote “yes” for the bill on Tuesday would have passed it into law. The defeat was a shock to many.

“I thought it was a no brainer,” said Jeanette Lee, president of the Dallas County chapter of Alabama New South Coalition. “To me it was a sign to the world that Alabama was ready to move forward and continue to put the past behind us. I couldn’t imagine that it would not get passed easily.”

Apparently, the bill was well on its way to an easy victory at the polls until about a month ago. That’s where it gets confusing.

Initially, there was a buzz that grew into full out opposition about a week before the election.

“I found out almost five weeks ago,” said John Giles, president of the Christian Coalition of Alabama and one of the Amendment’s chief opposers. “I was in full support of the original bill that was introduced last year by Sen. Wendell Mitchell.”

Giles contends that the final bill that was passed last year is not the version that was originally introduced and that the additional changes were made without “full disclosure.”

The first and second versions of the bill struck out language that included lines about segregation such as:

“Separate schools shall be provided for white and colored children and no child of either race shall be permitted to attend a school of the other race.”

They also repealed the sections related to the poll tax.

The problem for the opponents of the bill was a modification from the original piece of legislation that struck and additional line from the Constitution which reads:

“…but nothing in this Constitution shall be construed as creating or recognizing any right to education or training at public expense, nor as limiting the authority and duty of the legislature, in furthering or providing for education, to require or impose conditions or procedures for education, to require or impose conditions or procedures deemed necessary to the preservation of peace and order”

What does this mean in layman’s terms? It depends on who you ask. According to Giles and others opponents of the bill, it means – lawsuits.

“If this thing had of passed you would have lawsuits coming up demanding a right to education and it would allow activist judges to define what that right is and trying to make legislation from the bench.” said Giles.

Supporters of Amendment 2 object to that idea wholeheartedly.

“I disagree,” said Sen. Hank Sanders, one of the co-sponsors of the bill. “There is legislation in existence that prevents judges from creating legislation so that should not be a concern.”

According to Sanders, this Amendment was about exactly what it says – removing racist language from the Constitution of Alabama.

He says that Sec. 256 of the 1901 Constitution states that the government shall establish a system of public education but after the Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 the Alabama legislature added amendment 111, which call for Separate schools for Black and white students, as an end-run around the Supreme Court decision.

“If amendment 2 had of passed we would have simply reverted back to the original language from 1901 Constitution.” said Sanders.

Locally, the amendment passed, but only by a slim margin.

“There was so much confusion,” said Lee. “First people were talking about new taxes and then funding for education, there was too little good information out there and I think it confused people terribly.”

Benjamin Austin of Selma wasn’t confused. He voted “no” to the amendment and was clear about his choice.

“I would certainly support an amendment that removed racist language because it’s wrong and it’s a hindrance,” said Austin. “But for a legislator to taint a piece of legislation by adding a ‘piggyback’ on there is wrong, and I’m glad it was defeated.”

Austin, like Giles says that they would gladly support the original bill that removes only the racist language, but could not endorse this bill because of the additional language.

Giles says that there is no need to have legislation that makes education a Constitutional right for every child because it is already provided without objection.

“In the 45 years that I have been in Alabama – no child, that I know of, has been denied a public education,” said Giles “Every child has the gift or a priviledge of education and it’s not in danger of being taken away.”

Many fear that the Amendment not passing will bring more negative national attention to Alabama’s image.

“It makes us look bad because here we have an amendment that removes racist language and racist provisions from our Constitution in the 21st Century, you might expect it not to pass in the 19th or 20th Century, but not in the 21st,” said Sen. Sanders. “This is going to cause problems with economic development because we are competing with other states. All in all it is a bad mark across the face of Alabama.”

If the bill is re-introduced and passed Alabamians will not have a chance to vote on it again until 2006.