Jennifer Foster: Exactly what are they afraid of?

I learned a long time ago not to attend political forums with the expectation of getting straight answers from candidates.
It’s sad, but it’s true, that politicians tend to use such forums as an opportunity to parrot their talking points, sometimes without even bothering to rephrase them and with complete disregard to what was actually asked.

But I was pleasantly surprised by this week’s gubernatorial forum, hosted Tuesday by Auburn University.

There were disappointments, sure, but in large measure, the candidates stuck to answering the questions asked of them.

It’s amazing what you can learn when they do.

Take, for example, the growing clamor for constitutional reform in this state. It’s beginning to eclipse other issues – because it affects every issue. But the six GOP candidates for governor and one Democratic hopeful are unified in their opposition to a constitutional convention.

I still don’t understand or accept their reasons. In fact, some of their arguments are downright condescending – for example, Tim James’ contention Tuesday that Alabamians somehow couldn’t handle the special interest influence that would come to bear on the process of choosing electors for a convention.

In other words, convention opponents trust us voters to elect them, but not electors for ourselves. Double standards, anyone?

But it became clear Tuesday that GOP gubernatorial candidates are coalescing around a strategy to deal with the growing calls for constitutional reform.

They want reform, they say, but through an article-by-article review of the document, conducted by the Alabama Legislature.

Yes, you read that right: Candidates who are concerned about the influence that special interests could have on a convention want to insulate the reform process from those special interests by undertaking it in … Montgomery.

Now, once you’ve recovered from the simply laughable idea that Alabamians can depend on their state politicians, who wield so much power over local issues, to willingly cede that power to counties and municipalities, think about how that piecemeal process could be accomplished, from a practical standpoint.

I asked one of the candidates about it after the forum. An article-by-article review, with proposed changes submitted to the voters? How would that even work?

Oh, it wouldn’t work, he said directly. It would be a mess.

? ? ?

Folks, the No. 1 issue facing this state isn’t economic development. It isn’t ethics, it isn’t the education budget and it isn’t the grocery tax.

It is constitutional reform – because reform would touch all those things.

I sat in my chair and marveled at the candidates agreeing that the 1901 constitution is flawed. State Rep. Robert Bentley called it “long,” “cumbersome” and “a pain in the neck.” But all but one of the candidates agreed that its protections – presumably, against tax increases alone – are worth all its innumerable flaws.

James even called it a “firewall.”

A friend who watched the forum online said James was half right: Much bigger, and the massive thing, with its 900-plus amendments, will be a wall in the literal sense.

A constitutional convention doesn’t mean that everyone will pay more in taxes. It doesn’t mean we’ll lose our private property rights. It doesn’t mean that we’ll spend less on education or that we’ll keep the grocery tax or repeal it. It just means that we start over. It means that we get a chance to keep the things that work, and fix the things that don’t.

Of the six GOP and two Democratic candidates for governor, only one – U.S. Rep. Artur Davis – supports giving Alabamians a voice through a constitutional convention.

What are the others so afraid of?

Jennifer Foster is a political enthusiast who lives in Auburn and writes a column for the Opelika-Auburn News. She can be reached at