State Rep. Reed Ingram (R-Pike Road) has proposed an amendment to the Alabama Constitution requiring the Alabama State Department of Education (ALSDE) to adopt policies requiring a daily recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance and a prayer "consistent with Judeo-Christian values" at the beginning of every school day, with penalties for violation.
Ingram's constitutional amendment (CA) would require a three-fifths vote by both legislative bodies. The measure would then appear on the next statewide ballot for a vote from the state's citizenry before it could be ratified.
The CA is a continuation of House Speaker Nathaniel Ledbetter's (R-Rainsville) legislation requiring the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of each school day.
Ledbetter's bill was signed into law in 2019 but did not include any enforcement provisions. According to Ingram, his bill includes provisions to penalize school systems that fail to abide by the CA.
In addition to mandating the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of the school day, the CA would require the ALSDE policy to include a "prayer consistent with Judeo-Christian values."
"These kids don't know what the pledge means," Ingram told 1819 News. "A lot of these schools don't even have it in their school anymore. Now, it is a law, but there's no teeth in it. There's a lot of schools that don't do it. So I think we need to make it mandatory, and if they don't do the pledge and they don't do the prayer like me and you growing up, they'll lose 25% of their budget."
Under the bill, upon determining a continued pattern of intentional refusal to comply with the CA, the state's education superintendent would be authorized to withhold 25% of state funding allocated to the offending local board of education.
The legislature would be authorized to further reduce funding in cases of continued refusal to honor the CA.
Ingram told 1819 News he chose to pursue a CA instead of a traditional legislative approach to combat the bill's inevitable challenges. He also said the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has already requested a public hearing and plans to oppose it.
"There are a couple of ways it could be challenged," Ingram said. "One is the typical way, with education on the federal side, it could be problematic because we could lose the funding. But with Trump taking off all the strings attached to that money and just letting the states handle it, that's what I'm betting on."
"The next thing is, if this does go to court because the [SPLC] has already issued a public hearing on it, I heard," he continued. "So, the [SPLC] is going to come after it. But, if they challenge it in court, it will hold up a lot better if it's a [CA], a vote of the people by 80% or 90%; it would really look good in front of a judge. That's the reason I did it as a [CA]."
To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email craig.monger@1819news.com.
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
