Texas is known for a detailed cumbersome Constitution as opposed to the U.S. Constitution. The state founders intended it to be so
Im gonna guess changing the state constitutions from their basic structures is next to impossible. God bless people like Juan for being informed but he is really smart guy who does details. I see him in NBA contract threads and he seems to know the NBA CBA very well. So you're right, it should not take a person of his skill to be interested let alone be informed.
The Texas Constitution as it stands is totally ridiculous, and there has been repeated talk of trying to call a Convention and rewrite it into something that is workable and actually makes sense. But as it stands...these types of Amendments are how the process works.
What I’ll probably vote: Yes: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10 No: 4, 6, 8, 9 For 5, I don’t like that we have to have an amendment for what should just be a law, but the government can’t seem to keep their hands off the money and the state parks have to be funded. For 6, the organization that is on the receiving end of the money, CPrit, has been known to misuse funds and had to be reorg’d due to that in 2012. I’m good with not having an amendment just for that reason. For 7, it’s coming out of the Permanent fund...it’s not enough, but not giving them the money keeps them at half that while the fund draws more interest. May as well throw it at education t hopefully lower or, more likely, stall property taxes a bit; the fund can more than handle it. For 8, I share your feelings on this one...something smells fishy. For 9, there’s absolutely no need for this amendment.
Updated my thinking a bit. Prop 1, judges: Still yes. Prop 2, water infrastructure bonds: Still yes. From this site: Looks like this prop will make issuing bonds easier, but makes the amount slightly lower. Prop 3, disaster tax relief: Still yes. Prop 4, no income tax: Still Hells no. I can see the benefit. It gives companies thinking of locating in Texas plenty of certainty that they won't have to worry about a state income tax at any time in the future if they locate here. Very business friendly. I guess I'm just not that friendly. Prop 5, parks: Going Yes. Obviously the legislature want to put cuffs on themselves regarding this fund, so I'll let them. Prop 6, cancer: Going yes. I see criticisms of mismanagement from 2012. That was 7 years ago. Prop 7, school fund: Going yes. These are funds raised for education, but not allowed to be spent. They should be spent. Prop 8: Going Yes. Looks tricksy, but as I understand it, it comes from the Rainy Day Fund. I'm still bitter that Perry wouldn't use it for an actual rainy day. So, lets use it for prevention. Prop 9, gold depository: No. Precious metals are commodities like any other and should be treated the same. It's not money. Prop 10, dogs: Of course.
fwiw: it's not as bad as what you are referring to that other states do with Ballot Initiatives. It's pretty damn hard to get these on the ballot in Texas. All these propositions are "Legislatively Referred Constitutional Amendments" All Texas Constitutional Amendments require: Texas House must pass it by super-majority 2/3rds vote Texas Senate must pass it by super-majority 2/3rds vote Legislature then sends the amendment to public vote We can say that these should be laws rather than constitutional amendments, but really, that's just somewhat semantics for Texas. All these propositions would likely become law, since rules state that they already have super-majority in both chambers of congress.
Good thread idea, JV. Here's what I think about the proposed amendments. I'll add that our constitution is an unwieldy mess, with over 400 amendments, but that's another topic. Prop-1 At first blush, no. It doesn't say what offices they are talking about. I wouldn't want a judge to also be the county tax collector, for example. Needs more clarification. Prop-2 Yes. Our state's infrastructure is falling down around our ears. I don't doubt that this money would be put to good use. Prop-3 No. The local governments will need this income badly if they are hit by a natural disaster, or an exploding refinery, for example. I would rather see an amendment providing this kind of tax relief from the Economic Stabilization Fund, not from local governments dealing with a disaster. Prop-4 NO! An unneeded and absurd amendment. We already have the right to vote before any state income tax is imposed. If the majority decide they want one, that's democracy, folks. Prop-5 YES! Like so many laws in Texas, this is one that was well intended when passed, but has been raided for anything a member in the Legislature can sneak into a bill. Texas Parks and Wildlife need ALL of these funds, they were intended for their use, and we should pass this amendment. Prop-6 Yes. As someone who has had close family members brought down by this terrible disease, I'm all for it. If it's ends up going to the premier research hospitals of the state, isn't that where it will do the most good? Prop-7 Yes. Public education needs more funding, badly. I'm assuming that none of these funds will go to charter schools. They shouldn't. I'm a strong supporter of public education. Prop-8 Yes. Our state is busy trying to wash itself away. This funding is needed. The Economic Stabilization Fund is a huge state slush fund currently holding in escrow about $15 billion dollars. It's just sitting there. Use part of it for this. Prop-9 No! This sounds like a gift to special interests and something that would have almost no positive impact on the average Texas citizen. It would largely be a gift to the richest Texans. They don't need it. Prop-10 Yes! That's the obvious answer.
I think the issue for judoka is still they shouldn't be in front of voters in terms of these decisions need to be made by informed legislators. These aren't value judgements. What do i know about poor muncipalities's flood issues
The philosophy governing Texas's lawmaking process is the conservative idea of the people having the ultimate decision making authority.
I'm against most direct democracy, too. But in Texas, all the items in this thread have made it through super-majority votes in both the House and Senate. They were all first proposed by a congressman, just like a bill. We don't do amendments like other states do via grass-roots ballot initiatives. Prop2 is not really about flood issues. It's about recharging the bonds that the State Water Board can issue, which is all managed by an existing State department, but they are running out of bonds. The state constitution does not allow the legislature to create State debt in excess of $200,000 without a constitutional amendment (except to repel invasion or defend the State in time of War ). To create debt, congress must pass a resolution with 2/3rds vote and then put to public vote. The Prop was created by congressmen, approved by Congress, but Texas makes voters approve such added debt.
https://www.click2houston.com/news/...t-the-income-tax-question-before-election-day Arguments for : State Sen. Paul Bettencourt (R-Houston) co-authored the proposition and said it's necessary to keep a lid on taxes. "If you're against the state income tax, you need to vote yes for Proposition 4," Bettencourt said. "Don't listen to anyone else or any other input. If you're against state income tax, you vote yes on Prop 4." Proposition supporters have also said the amendment would send a message that the Lone Star State is committed to maintaining a business-friendly, low-tax economy. ------------ Wait What? Prop 4 Yay or Nay I cannot lie. . .the fact that a Republican wants me to vote for it . . .makes me want to vote against it . .. i just don't trust the logiv I see a meme saying a YES ir really a NO . . . .
I definitely voted no. Republicans have a habit of trying to extend their influence to potential future legislation rather than just legislating in the present. Voted no on 4 and 9, yes on all others.
Looks like all but #1 passed. I cannot imagine why #10 did not pass with 100% voting yes. WTF, 6% voted no???? https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2019/texas-election-results-2019-constitutional-amendments/
Usually props pass, but it's easy to imagine that there is 6% of the electorate that vote no on just about anything because they don't like or trust the government or the ballot process or otherwise want to protest. I was surprised to see Prop 1 fail. Was there some organized opposition? Disappointed but not surprised that Props 4 and 9 passed.
It wasn't surprising to see the income tax amendment pass. I saw many uninformed people saying that if you vote no then there WILL be a state income tax.
