Today begins early voting on eleven additional amendments to the Texas Constitution. This gerrymandered state document contains more than 90,000 words and 456 amendments
Send your comments and news tips to online.editor@valleyspringcomm.net or to Mr. O'Dell at codell@austin.rr.com
By Charles O'Dell, Ph.D.
RoundUp Contributor
Do you believe your vote makes a difference? How about only ten percent of the voters making decisions for the other ninety percent? Only you can cast your vote.Early voting ends Oct. 30, and the election is Tuesday, Nov. 3, so there is ample opportunity to vote if you believe in democracy.
Today begins early voting on eleven additional amendments to the Texas Constitution. This gerrymandered state document contains more than 90,000 words and 456 amendments. By contrast, our inspirational U.S. Constitution contains just 7,876 words, including 27 amendments, one of which was to repeal the 18th amendment.
Detailed information about the eleven proposed amendments is available at these two links:
http://www.hro.house.state.tx.us/focus/amend81.pdf
http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/pubsconamend/analyses09/analyses09.pdf
Frankly, these are not constitutional issues and the legislature could pass statutes for these issues instead of further cluttering our State Constitution.
Here are our recommendations. Maybe you agree.
AGAINST Proposition 1: Allows cities and counties to sell bonds to pay for "buffer areas" or open spaces near military bases. This would stave off encroachment that could prevent base expansion. The money also could be used for roads and other improvements to assist military installations. Read higher taxes.
AGAINST Proposition 2: The proposal bars residential appraisals from being set based on "highest and best use." This amendment is a wolf in sheep’s clothing and would make commercial expansion less costly to developers. The appraisal process already provides for homeowner appeals of tax bills. Business organizations all supported this amendment in senate and house hearings.
AGAINST Proposition 3: This amendment gives state lawmakers the authority to set standards and practices for appraisals. The legislature doesn’t require a constitutional amendment to set appraisal standards. It already has that authority. Something is fishy here.
AGAINST Proposition 4: Allowing use of state money to help state universities achieve the coveted tier-one status. Restricted to only a few major universities. Spend to advance educational opportunities at all state colleges and universities.
FOR Proposition 5: Allowing adjoining appraisal districts to share a single board for appraisal disputes if they choose to do so.
FOR Proposition 6: Continue the bonding authority used by the Veterans Land Board to offer below-market financing to veterans for home and land purchases.
FOR Proposition 7: Allows Texas State Guard members to hold "civil office" (elected office).
FOR Proposition 8: Authorizes use of state resources to help build and operate veterans hospitals in Texas.
AGAINST Proposition 9: Texas already has an Open Beaches Act that guarantees public access to beaches. Just enforce it.
AGAINST Proposition 10: The Constitution already provides for emergency service district officeholders to serve two-year terms unless specifically exempted. Why change to four-year terms?
FOR Proposition 11: Specifically allows governmental entities eminent domain power only to take private property for public use and not for "economic development or enhancement of tax revenue purposes."
As co-founder of Hays Community Action Network (HaysCAN) in 2003, Mr. O’Dell strives to carry out the mission of ensuring open, accessible and accountable government. He is a long time and close observer of the workings of the Hays County Commissioners Court. He earned a degree in Agricultural Education and a Masters in Ag Economics at Texas Tech, and, later, a Ph.D. at The University of Maryland while employed as a Research Economist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in Washington, D.C. Texas born and raised on a family farm, O’Dell is a Hays County Master Naturalist and board president of the Ethical Society of Austin.
8 comments:
First of all, I want to commend Mr. O'Dell and this blog for covering the upcoming elections and encouraging all citizens to become informed and vote.
I disagree with Mr. O'Dell regarding the fourth proposition. Texas State University stands to benefit greatly from the extra funds and I believe all of Hays county should support our local institution of higher learning. The reason why some schools are singled out is because UT and A&M already are given a lot from the state. Given the current overcrowding in these two schools, it is our duty to provide other chances for our children to have access to superior higher education. And as we all know a more education public is better for the economy and community as a whole.
You can visit the Hays County Elections website for information about early voting locations and hours.
http://www.elections.co.hays.tx.us/November32009brElectionInformation/tabid/110/Default.aspx
Again, thank you for starting this discussion.
I will vote for none of these, as I have not voted for previous proposed amendments in the past decade of elections.
The Legislature needs to buckle-down and do its job for the people of Texas.
The Texas Constitution has been amended more than the U.S. Constitution.
It is time to rewrite the entire Texas Constitution instead of every 2 years adding amendments to it.
If a house is built on an imperfect foundation, you do not consistently add on to that structure. You rebuild the foundation and then the house won't need as many amendments to it and can handle any add-ons better.
These never-ending proposed amendments are symptoms of a failing political and legislative system.
I recommend voting no on each of these 11 items and then demand that our elected legislators rewrite the constitution so that it is structurally sound.
Unfortunately, most amendments are approved by Texas voters, who really do not comprehend the issues because they are being manipulated and deceived by legislators and their special interests.
I think it would be grand if our legislators had the gumption to pass a law implementing initiative and referendum for the people of Texas. Maybe the darling of developers and Dripping Springs, Patrick Rose, would consider sponsoring the legislation should he be re-elected. These constitutional amendments serve only to concentrate more power in the state and in the hands of the politicians and special interests. I&R would put some real power back into the hands of the electorate and would make things a whole lot more interesting in our great state, democratically speaking. A novel concept, isn't it? More power to the people and less power to the state and politicians. Rose, unfortunately, is of the same breed of 'go along to get alongs' that occupy our Capitol. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to hear his position on I&R for Texans, don't you think?
Mr. O’Dell’s usual liberal take on the propositions, he loves taxes and government control, he hates developers and us keeping more of our own money.
Here is MY take:
Prop. 1 NO Unnecessary spending for no valid reason.
Prop. 2 YES Keep property taxes lower in areas of hot development.
Prop. 3 YES Standards for appraisals
Prop. 4 NO More spending for fat universities that waste money by the ton. End tenure then we can talk.
Prop. 5 YES Standardization within an area.
Prop. 6 NO More spending and taxes.
Prop. 7 YES Military holding public office is not a good idea, our forefathers were against it.
Prop. 8 NO State money to Veterans Hospitals, I don’t think so, it is a Federal function.
Prop. 9 YES Assure Free access to beaches so wealthy HOAs can’t block it off.
Prop 10 YES Term Limits
Prop 11 YES to keep the State from seizing your property and giving it to some developer.
We can't even agree what the amendments contain. That's what a good constitutional amendment is suppose to do...fool voters.
My first rule in constitutional elections is if its not clear, vote NO.
Constitutional amendments in Texas are a political tool to get legislators the authority they want but are afraid to pass a bill that can be hung on the legislators.
Instead, weasel-word an amendment and let the voters pass it...they most often do...and then there is no political heat. The voters said yes.
We don't have a Texas Constitution. We have a political junk yard manual.
Anyone see Frontline tonight? Make you angry? It's not about Republican or Democrats, liberal or conservatives...its about Wall Street greed and lining the pockets of our Congress and the White House at the expense of our country.
Sadly, its going on right here in Hays County but the local "Greenspan's" are in control.
I agree with Mr. O'Dell and with the Anon who said he/she will not vote for any of them.
The sooner we all vote no, the sooner the signal is sent to legislators that we aren't their slaves.
As I am researching these amendments, I found the Burnt Orange Report summaries and endorsements very helpful. You can view them at http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/9527/endorsements-2009-constitutional-amendment-elections.
It's so nice to find other people excited about this upcoming election :)
Why on Earth would O'Dell support allowing an appraisal district to tax based upon what the property could be used for rather than what the property is being used for?
How outrageous to suggest that the property owners can simply utilize the appeal process. I've got a better idea that won't waste the property owners' time and resources for another government bureaucracy - take away the ability of an appraisal district to tax based upon what could speculatively be done with the property. What's happening O'Dell is that people are essentially be evicted from their own property via property taxes based upon what the property allegedly could be used for. Undoubtedly the property could also be used for agricultural use - but you won't see any appraisal district opting to treat the property as if it had an ag exemption.
For all of your "sustainable" talk, all you've done is ensure that existing use for farms and many homes cannot be preserved. Perhaps you could reconsider your position on Proposition #2.
Post a Comment