Resource: Fact Sheet

Juries matter: Why Alabama must end judicial override

By Stephen Stetson

The right to a trial by jury is one of the most sacred elements of the American criminal justice system. The basic principle of being judged by a jury of peers is a cornerstone of a nation built on a populist spirit and suspicion of elites. But in Alabama, members of a jury in a capital murder trial are not empowered to set the sentence. Rather, a single judge, and not the jury, makes the ultimate decision about whether the defendant should be executed. More than 100 people have been sentenced to death in Alabama since 1978 despite a jury’s sentencing recommendation of life without parole.

Alabama is the last state in the country to allow these “judicial overrides.” Two bills in the Alabama Legislature’s 2017 regular session – HB 32, sponsored by Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, and SB 16, sponsored by Sen. Dick Brewbaker, R-Pike Road – would end judicial overrides and respect the jury’s decision in weighty matters of life or death.

This fact sheet examines the history and shortcomings of judicial overrides and explains why it makes sense both morally and financially for Alabama to abolish this unusual practice.

A higher minimum wage would help Alabama families make ends meet and strengthen our state’s economy

By Alabama Arise

Too many hard-working Alabamians aren’t paid enough to get ahead. Alabama ranks in the bottom third of states for average hourly wages. Around 77,000 Alabamians earn wages at or below the $7.25 per hour minimum established by the federal government in 2009, and another 394,000 earn less than $10 an hour. In the absence of a state minimum wage, Birmingham in 2015 set its own minimum wage of $10.10 per hour, for implementation by mid-2017. However, the Alabama Legislature overruled, or pre-empted, that measure in 2016 with a state law that prohibits local governments from mandating a minimum wage and other employment practices.

The “pre-emption law” underscores the need for Alabama to create a state minimum wage. Forty-five other states have their own minimum wage law, and 29 of them have state minimum wages that exceed the federal level. HB 26, sponsored by Rep. Juandalynn Givan, D-Birmingham, proposes to:

  • Establish an Alabama minimum wage at $10 per hour.
  • Adjust the minimum wage every three years to reflect increases in the Consumer Price Index.
  • Require that wages for tipped employees be at least 30 percent of the federal or state minimum wage, whichever is greater.
  • Require that employers ensure tipped employees’ combined wages and tips equal the minimum wage.

The benefits would be widespread. The Alabama Minimum Wage Act would:

  • Raise incomes for the 471,000 Alabamians who now earn less than $10 an hour, and likely prompt raises for many others who earn slightly above that amount.
  • Reduce income inequality by lifting thousands of Alabama families out of poverty.
  • Increase consumer spending, boosting state and local economies and tax revenues.
  • Make sure wage protections keep pace with inflation.

BOTTOM LINE: By setting a state minimum wage of $10 per hour, Alabama would help hundreds of thousands of families make ends meet, boost consumer spending and strengthen our state’s economy.

What Alabamians should know about a state lottery

By Carol Gundlach

On the question of a state lottery, Arise’s member organizations hold widely varying positions, some of them based on strong moral or religious beliefs. Because our bylaws prevent us from taking positions that deeply divide our membership or offend members’ deeply held beliefs, Arise Citizens’ Policy Project and Alabama Arise are neutral on the lottery. However, objective analysis reveals several lessons Alabama can learn from other states.

This fact sheet examines how lotteries affect revenues for public services, how they affect people living in poverty, and what questions Alabama still would have to answer if it approves a lottery.

A long-term budget fix includes Medicaid expansion

By Jim Carnes

As Alabama lawmakers grapple to prevent devastating Medicaid cuts, the time is right to address a related threat to our state: the health coverage gap. Nearly 200,000 Alabama workers we depend on every day – in agriculture, food service, retail, home health and other fields – have no access to regular health care. They have no health insurance because their employers don’t offer it. They earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but too little to qualify for federal tax credits to buy private plans. As a result, they often struggle to work while dealing with health problems that sap their productivity, add stress to their households and get worse without timely care.

Closing the coverage gap would not only save lives and help working families; it would stabilize the budget and boost our economy. This fact sheet by policy director Jim Carnes takes a closer look at how Medicaid expansion would benefit Alabama’s health, quality of life and economy.

A menu of options to improve voting rights in Alabama

By Stephen Stetson

Alabama is famous around the world for our historic fights over equal access to the polls. Our entire democratic system depends on how elections are structured and who can participate. When barriers exclude people from voting, they often lose faith in a system that doesn’t seem to value their voice in our society’s decision-making process.

What proposals are in play?

Civil rights anniversaries and national media attention have placed increasing focus on voting rights issues in Alabama. Several legislative proposals have been advanced to expand access to voting and strengthen our state’s electoral system.

Several bills seek to restore voting rights to people who lost them. HB 268, sponsored by Rep. Mike Jones, R-Andalusia, and SB 231, sponsored by Sen. Cam Ward, R-Alabaster, would clarify which crimes are considered “crimes of moral turpitude” that permanently disqualify people from voting – and which ones aren’t. Other bills that seek to streamline voting rights restoration include HB 222, sponsored by Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa; HB 245, sponsored by Rep. Thad McClammy, D-Montgomery; SB 186, sponsored by Sen. Linda Coleman-Madison, D-Birmingham; and SB 293, sponsored by Sen. Hank Sanders, D-Selma.

Several bills would ease voter registration. SB 156, sponsored by Sanders, would allow people to register on Election Day. Four other bills – HB 72, sponsored by Rep. Darrio Melton, D-Selma; HB 149, sponsored by Rep. Laura Hall, D-Huntsville; HB 259, sponsored by Rep. Mary Moore, D-Birmingham; and SB 71, sponsored by Coleman-Madison – would register people automatically when they apply for or renew a driver’s license or non-driver ID card.

Other bills would allow more voting time or seek to prevent mistakes. HB 163, sponsored by Rep. Richard Lindsey, D-Centre, and SB 302, sponsored by Sen. Rodger Smitherman, D-Birmingham, would require counties to offer in-person early voting options. HB 52, sponsored by Rep. Mike Ball, R-Madison, would require the state to notify absentee voters if a disqualifying mistake was made on their ballot so they can know not to repeat it. And HB 303, sponsored by Rep. Rod Scott, D-Fairfield, would require registrars to notify living voters who are being purged from the voter list.

What’s the bottom line?

All of the above bills would improve the health of Alabama’s elections and the responsiveness of those who serve in public office. In particular, establishing a clear and common-sense framework for people to regain voting rights after fulfilling the terms of their sentence would help ensure that everyone feels they have a chance to participate in our system of governance.

Death is different: Reforming Alabama’s capital punishment system

By Stephen Stetson

How sure are you that human beings will get it right every single time? A single small mistake in a death penalty case could result in an unjust execution – an error that can never be corrected.

People accused of capital crimes deserve every possible safeguard to ensure the integrity of a conviction. Several bills have been introduced this session to improve Alabama’s death penalty process by lowering the risks of errors and injustice.

What are the capital punishment reform bills?

SB 237, sponsored by Sen. Dick Brewbaker, R-Montgomery, is a bipartisan effort to establish a statewide Innocence Commission to examine capital convictions. The commission would evaluate whether errors occurred in any of the stages leading up to the conviction and sentencing. The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved the bill, and it awaits a vote by the full Senate.

Sen. Hank Sanders, D-Selma, also has introduced his usual slate of proposed death penalty reforms. SB 117 would end the process known as “judicial override,” in which judges in capital cases can disregard a jury’s recommended sentence of life imprisonment without parole and impose a death sentence. This bill is particularly important in light of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling (Hurst v. Florida) that casts new critical light on this practice. Adding extra timeliness to this debate is a Jefferson County circuit judge’s ruling on March 3 that Alabama’s capital sentencing scheme is unconstitutional. (The state is expected to appeal that ruling.)

Sanders also has introduced SB 153, which would place a temporary moratorium on death sentences and executions. Finally, two additional Sanders bills would bring Alabama law into compliance with U.S. Supreme Court rulings that forbid executions of defendants who were under age 18 at the time of the crime (SB 154) and forbid executions of defendants who have mental disabilities (SB 155).

What’s the bottom line?

Several bills offer a path forward on the rocky terrain of capital punishment in Alabama. With nearly 200 people sitting on death row in this state, it’s crucial that we soberly assess current laws and the risks of errors. Whether you’re for or against the death penalty, on this life-or-death issue, justice requires legislative reforms to Alabama’s capital punishment system.

Cigarette tax for Medicaid: A win-win to improve health and fill Alabama’s revenue gap

By Alabama Arise

The future of Alabama Medicaid is on the line as lawmakers consider a threadbare 2017 General Fund budget. Without significant new revenue, Medicaid would not only lose the promising regional care organizations (RCOs) set to launch in October but also would cut vital services and doctor payments. Those cuts could place the Medicaid program itself – and Alabama’s entire health care system – at risk.

The Alabama Health Care Improvement Task Force has proposed a solution that would:

  • Increase Alabama’s cigarette tax by 75 cents a pack, bringing in an estimated $200 million in new General Fund revenue in the first year.
  • Direct 90 percent of the new revenue (or $180 million) to Medicaid.
  • Direct the remaining 10 percent (or $20 million) to the Department of Mental Health for substance abuse treatment services.

A 75-cent cigarette tax increase would be a win-win for Alabama because it would:

  • Fill the Medicaid budget shortfall, strengthening the program and saving the RCO reforms that are designed to save money while keeping patients healthier.
  • Encourage smokers to quit and discourage young people from starting.
  • Have disproportionate health benefits for low-income Alabamians, who are more likely to respond to the tax increase by quitting smoking.
  • Have a long-term positive impact on public health – and health care costs for everyone. Even if smokers quit and cigarette tax revenues drop, Medicaid would save money because fewer people would have smoking-related diseases.

BOTTOM LINE: Now is the time to raise the cigarette tax by 75 cents a pack to save Medicaid, save health care dollars and save lives in Alabama.

‘Ban the box’ law would help rebuild lives in Alabama

By Stephen Stetson

How sure are you that human beings will get it right every single time? A single small mistake in a death penalty case could result in an unjust execution – an error that can never be corrected.

People accused of capital crimes deserve every possible safeguard to ensure the integrity of a conviction. Several bills have been introduced this session to improve Alabama’s death penalty process by lowering the risks of errors and injustice.

What are the capital punishment reform bills?

SB 237, sponsored by Sen. Dick Brewbaker, R-Montgomery, is a bipartisan effort to establish a statewide Innocence Commission to examine capital convictions. The commission would evaluate whether errors occurred in any of the stages leading up to the conviction and sentencing. The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved the bill, and it awaits a vote by the full Senate.

Sen. Hank Sanders, D-Selma, also has introduced his usual slate of proposed death penalty reforms. SB 117 would end the process known as “judicial override,” in which judges in capital cases can disregard a jury’s recommended sentence of life imprisonment without parole and impose a death sentence. This bill is particularly important in light of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling (Hurst v. Florida) that casts new critical light on this practice. Adding extra timeliness to this debate is a Jefferson County circuit judge’s ruling on March 3 that Alabama’s capital sentencing scheme is unconstitutional. (The state is expected to appeal that ruling.)

Sanders also has introduced SB 153, which would place a temporary moratorium on death sentences and executions. Finally, two additional Sanders bills would bring Alabama law into compliance with U.S. Supreme Court rulings that forbid executions of defendants who were under age 18 at the time of the crime (SB 154) and forbid executions of defendants who have mental disabilities (SB 155).

What’s the bottom line?

Several bills offer a path forward on the rocky terrain of capital punishment in Alabama. With nearly 200 people sitting on death row in this state, it’s crucial that we soberly assess current laws and the risks of errors. Whether you’re for or against the death penalty, on this life-or-death issue, justice requires legislative reforms to Alabama’s capital punishment system.

A big win for second chances: Alabama’s lifetime SNAP and TANF bans end

By Carol Gundlach

It’s a quiet win for thousands of Alabamians seeking to rebuild their lives and provide for their families: Alabama is joining the majority of U.S. states by allowing people with a past felony drug conviction to receive SNAP food assistance and TANF financial assistance, as long as they are otherwise eligible. The effective starting date for this change is Jan. 30, 2016.

The end of Alabama’s SNAP and TANF bans is good news for state budgets and for families. This policy change will help cut corrections costs in the cash-strapped General Fund budget by making it easier for released prisoners to reintegrate into the community, which will help reduce recidivism. Importantly, restoring SNAP and TANF benefits also will help prevent hunger and homelessness among some of Alabama’s most vulnerable families.

Read this fact sheet by ACPP policy analyst Carol Gundlach for the details.

SNAP time limits: What you need to know

By Carol Gundlach

Many unemployed Alabama adults once again face strict time limits for assistance under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps. These “able-bodied adults without dependents” – folks who do not live in a SNAP household with children – will be allowed to receive SNAP benefits for only three months during a three-year period (ending Dec. 31, 2018), unless they either meet complex work requirements or are found to be exempt from the time limit.

This federal rule was part of the 1996 welfare reform law, but because of the recession, it has not been in effect for nearly a decade. Now that the economy has improved, reinstatement of this rule will deny food assistance for many of the nation’s most vulnerable low-income people. Because Alabama’s three-month clock started ticking Jan. 1, 2016, all able-bodied adults without dependents receiving SNAP on Jan. 1, 2016, will lose benefits on April 1, 2016, if they are not working, participating in job training or declared exempt. The change could cut off SNAP benefits for nearly 50,000 Alabamians and as many as 1 million people nationwide.

This fact sheet by ACPP policy analyst Carol Gundlach takes a closer look at the SNAP time limits, the exemptions from them in Alabama and the steps that service providers can take to help people affected by the limits.