Conservatively, a couple of these seem like no brainers, should I care about the UofA board? I would think on #4 I would like to vote.


Proposed amendment #1 Allows posting of the 10 Commandments in public buildings, including schools.
Proposed amendment #2 Designates Alabama a “Pro-Life” state.
Proposed amendment #3 Allows changes to the University of Alabama Board of Trustees,
Proposed amendment #4 Allowed certain vacancies to be filled by appointment rather than special elections.

Do they not tack a bunch of unrelated crap to Yalls amendments like they do to ours in Florida?

NONE of these amendments actually mean what the average person thinks they mean. Absolutely NO on any amendment, they are all designed to deceive the average sheeple.

copy and paste with a little more info

The Alabama Fair Ballot Commission approved ballot statements last month and they are posted by the Secretary of State. Alabama voters will have their say on four statewide amendments on Nov. 6.

Amendment 1 says displays of the Ten Commandments can be posted at schools and on other state and local government property, provided that they meet constitutional requirements, such as being alongside other historical and educational documents. It says no public funds can be used to defend the law if it is challenged in court.

Amendment 2 says it's the public policy of the state to recognize the rights of the unborn, including the right to life. It says the state Constitution does not carry a right to an abortion or public funding for abortions. It would not outlaw abortion because the constitutional right to an abortion established by the U.S. Supreme Court remains in place.[Related: Sponsor says Tennessee case prompted Alabama abortion amendment.]

Amendment 3 concerns the makeup of the University of Alabama board of trustees. Section 264 of the Constitution requires three members from Alabama's 7th Congressional district, which includes Tuscaloosa, and two members from each of the state's other six districts. Amendment 3 is intended to preserve that alignment of the board if the districts change. It says membership will be based on the districts as they were on Jan. 1, 2018. There are concerns that Alabama could lose a district when the Congressional seats are reapportioned after the 2020 census. Amendment 3 does two other things. It would remove the requirement that UA trustees retire from the board after age 70. And it would remove the state superintendent of education's position as an ex-officio member of the board.

Amendment 4 would change how vacancies in the Legislature are filled. When a vacancy occurs, the state Constitution requires the governor to call a special election. The winner fills the remainder of the term. Vacancies that occurred late in this four-year term required several special elections at the tail end of the term, including two that weren't decided until May. That was just a month before primaries for the next full, four-year term. Amendment 4 would change the Constitution to say that vacancies that happen Oct. 1 or later in the third year of a four-year term would not be filled until the next regular election.

The Alabama ACLU has a vote no position on 1 and 2
They have neutral position on 3 and 4.

That means I will vote Yes on 1 & 2 and it doesn't matter on 3 & 4

3 is the “Paul Bryant Jr is about to turn 70 amendment” if I had to guess

Jr was born 12/19/44, making him 73 currently.

And zero of these amendments reduce the burden of government on the citizens of the State! It just codifies somebody else's wants because somebody want it that way, fine big government amendments.

How about amendment that removes government funded retirement system that is only for government employees to start.

way it reads #2gets a no!!!

(They can’t outlaw abortion if that’s what you’re wanting, if you’re pro life, this is a yes even though just political semantics)

On #3. It would remove the requirement that UA trustees retire from the board after age 70. And it would remove the state superintendent of education's position as an ex-officio member of the board.

This means that a powerful trustee is about to turn 70 and that they do not want an elected official to have any say in UA's affairs, even though UA is partly funded by taxpayers. I will vote NO on this one.

I will vote no, no, no, no

I always vote no on any amendments. We already have about 15,000 amendments. If one county wants to change something the whole state has to vote. Why should the whole state have to vote on an amendment that only concerns one county?

Looks like Joe Espy is about to turn 70, sure he's the one behind #3. Which is good reason to vote no on it.

Number 1 yes
Number 2 yes

The others are not important

Pretty much already done. New hires are Tier 2 employees and it basically sets a minimum age to retire. It has also made the talent pool for professional positions basically dry up due to the fact that the state benefits are no longer able to offset low starting salaries.

I think # 4is a go for a yes from me. Special elections cost too much when the primary is only a couple of months away.

I think you and I are gonna be great friends.