Monday, October 08, 2007

Upsetting one’s Constitution

Texas voters will be asked to return to various polling sites on Tuesday, Nov. 6 to approve, or disapprove, some 16 amendments to the state constitution, and frankly, it’s going to be an underwhelming response by the electorate. Almost nothing on the ballot is on major consequence and the time and expense is yet another reason why Texas needs to scrub its constitution clean and tighten the document to reflect all the hundreds of conflicting amendments.
On the ballot will be such illuminating matters as continuing to send funds to Angelo State University while it undergoes a change in its governance (Proposition 1). Quick, name the mascot for Angelo State. (Answer: Rams).
Proposition 12 provides “for the issuance of general obligation bonds by the Texas Transportation Commission in an amount not to exceed $5 billion to provide funding for highway improvement projects” but comes at an interesting time when the Texas Department of Transportation is whining about running out of repair funds. So which is it??
Some amendments (number 13 to deny bail for people violating certain court orders or conditions of release in felony or family violence cases or number 14 to allow a judge to finish his or her term even after reaching the mandatory retirement age in mid-term) should probably best be handled through regular state law. Others involve issuances of bonds to create various institutions or help targeted areas. Four amendments concern property taxes and exemptions for rural residents, car owners and totally disabled veterans. Again, why must a voter in Wichita Falls or Marfa have to go to the polls for something essentially to be decided by the legislature?
A few propositions are just too vague to know of their eventual impact on Texans. Number 8 states, “The constitutional amendment to clarify certain provisions relating to the making of a home equity loan and use of home equity loan proceeds.” Soooo … exactly what does THAT mean? What provisions and what clarifications?
Sadly, Proposition 2 should not be on the ballot at all. “The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of $500 million in general obligation bonds to finance educational loans to students and authorizing bond enhance­ment agreements with respect to general obligation bonds issued for that purpose.”
This is to shore up the Texas Tomorrow Fund because prior legislative sessions and decisions have allowed this worthy program to virtually starve to death – all in the name of some sort of invisible property tax cut that few people have seen come to genuine fruition.
Proposition 7 sounds logical but might be really confusing. “The constitutional amendment to allow govern­mental entities to sell property acquired through eminent domain back to the previous owners at the price the entities paid to acquire the property.” If an entity goes through the trouble of the hated eminent domain process (to seize property from someone for something or other), why reverse the process? If it were me, I would want something MORE for my troubles than merely the original price and a note stating, “Sorry; never mind.”
In my mind, the most important question is Proposition 19, the so-called Recorded Votes proposal, “… to require that a record vote be taken by a house of the legislature on final passage of any bill, other than certain local bills, of a resolution proposing or ratifying a constitutional amendment, or of any other nonceremonial resolution, and to provide for public access on the Internet to those record votes.”
Government conducted in secret is simply wrong – regardless of the level on which it is done. With the small exceptions allowed in the Texas Open Meetings Act, everything should be above board and plainly told to the tax paying citizens who elect these officials to represent them (not to enrich their own coffers or fatten the wallets of a privileged few).
One of the major problems in Austin is the burning desire to keep certain votes hush-hush as to not tell the people exactly what in the heck is happening in the Capitol Dome. For years, the powers-that-be have wanted many of their votes to be out of public view in order to avoid accountability. Any other hogwash excuse is just the plain, smelly droppings from the back end of a horse.
Finally, after years (perhaps decades) or trying by newspapers like the one I used to own or manage, and other open government groups, the voters will have a chance to begin holding their elected representative more accountable by making each vote cast ON THE RECORD. I strongly urge all of you to vote “yes” for Number 19 – so you will know exactly when these officials stand.
But my favorite choice on Nov. 6 is Proposition 10: “… to abolish the constitutional authority for the office of inspector of hides and animals.”
I will tell you that I am voting “no” on this.
I know many a legislator that needs his or her hide tanned. Often.

1 comment:

Gadfly said...

Chuck, I'm totally with you on the constitutional amendments. But, of course, the reason many of these items have to be amendments is the way the current constitution was created and hedged about in the first place, as a reaction to Edmund Davis' Radical Republican government.

That said, here's a couple of things that need amending:
1. Abolish the office of constable.
2. Make the office of sheriff an appointive, not elective position.