Tuesday, November 06, 2007
It's Election Day
To me, today is like Christmas and a Birthday rolled into one. In my opinion, it should be a national holiday. In Mississippi, the state in which I spent my college years, major state and county offices are up for grabs. In my home state of Texas, voters are being asked to consider a number of Constitutional amendments and local bonds. My recommendations on those amendments and one local bond follow shortly.
First, I must report that someone is playing dirty pool with the elections in Fort Worth, Texas. Naturally, I suspect Republicans. After all, it's not the first time they've done it. It's not even the second.
With that ugliness now a little more exposed, my recommendations follow.
* * * * * * * * * *
Recommendations for the November 6, 2007, Constitutional Amendment and Bond Election
Proposition 1: For
Angelo State University has already been made a part of the Texas Tech University System by statute. This amendment reflects that change in the Constitution and prevents any potential funding delivery issues that might come with the university having an unclear system affiliation.
Proposition 2: For
Student loans are necessary in these days of unregulated college tuition in Texas. Unlike the other spending proposed in this election, this money will be mostly repaid by those who directly borrow it. The few defaults that may occur are worth the risk. Educated people tend to have better paying jobs. This means those people will likely pay more in the sales and property taxes that run our state. More importantly, a functional and healthy democracy requires an educated population.
Proposition 3: Against
This proposition gives the legislature broad powers to set caps on homestead property taxes. While such caps are often good, this proposition is not specific in how the legislature would arrive at the amount of the caps or what those amounts might be. The phrase “…or a greater percentage as determined by the legislature…” just isn’t clear enough for my liking.
Proposition 4: Against
This proposition would allow the state to issue up to $1 billion in bonds to pay for various pieces of infrastructure, including buildings and equipment for a number of state agencies. The agencies include the Parks and Wildlife Department; Department of the Adjutant General; Department of State Health Services; Department of Aging and Disability Services; Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired; Texas Youth Commission; Texas Historical Commission; Texas Department of Criminal Justice; Texas School for the Deaf; and the Texas Department of Public Safety. All of these are deserving agencies that could greatly benefit from the funds. Unfortunately, this proposition does not include any specific language on how the money should be spent. In other words, the recipient agencies could spend your tax dollars on almost anything. Additionally, the 2007 legislative session concluded with a state budget surplus. The expenditures covered by this proposition could have been paid for with that surplus money.
Proposition 5: Against
This would give small towns (those with a population less than 10,000, of which Lampasas is one) the power to grant property tax freezes for downtown business owners. In many small towns, the people running the local government are often also downtown business owners. The opportunity for favoritism and cronyism runs rampant with this proposal.
Proposition 6: For
This proposal allows for the legislature to exempt from the ad valorem tax one motor vehicle owned by an individual that he or she uses for both business and personal use. I see a lot of potential for abuse here, but I think that small business owners will likely benefit from this proposition. They are the backbone of our economy. Let’s hope this is used to give them a break.
Proposition 7: For
This proposal would allow landowners whose property is taken by the government through eminent domain to purchase that property back from the government at the same price the landowners were given when it was seized should the government decide to sell that property because it is not longer needed for public purposes. Currently, government can seize land and then sell it later on the open market at a higher price.
Proposition 8: For
This proposal makes several changes to the process by which home equity loans are made in Texas. Among the various changes proposed in the amendment are three I support. First, borrowers could take out a second loan on their home following the declaration of an emergency. This could allow borrowers to receive loans to rebuild their homes following a natural disaster. This might lead some borrowers to take on more loans than they can afford, but some degree of personal responsibility must be expected of people looking for such loans. Second, this proposal would also require that all fees and costs be disclosed at the closing of a loan. I believe such discretion is a good thing. Third, this proposal would also prohibit the use of preprinted checks for the use of unsolicited loan advances. I believe this offers borrowers some protection from more unscrupulous lenders.
Proposition 9: For
This amendment would allow for the legislature to exempt all or part of the market value of the homesteads of certain veterans from property taxes. Specifically, this exemption would apply to veterans who are certified to have a total (100%) service-connected disability. I believe that someone who has sacrificed their complete capabilities in the service of his or her country deserves this and so much more in return from their government.
Proposition 10: For
None of the 254 counties in Texas still employs an “Inspector of Hides and Animals” among their various county officers. This amendment would remove references to this obsolete office from the Constitution.
Proposition 11: For
This amendment would require the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate to make a recorded vote on the final passage of any bill not considered “local” or “ceremonial” in nature. This means that there would be a clear listing of how our elected officials voted on major pieces of legislation. The more opportunity we have to hold politicians’ feet to the fire, the better.
Proposition 12: Against
This would allow for up to $5 billion in bonds to be issued for highway projects. Unfortunately, there is no language that states specifically which projects would be funded. Also, there is no guarantee this money won’t be used on toll road projects. The Texas Department of Transportation is already spending tax dollars on political consultants and commercial advertising while telling the public that it doesn’t have money for new roads. Perhaps they should adjust their current spending before we allow them any more.
Proposition 13: For
This proposal would allow the legislature to grant judges the authority to deny bail to people accused of violating conditions of release and certain protective orders in family violence cases. Obviously, anyone involved in a family violence case has already been accused of causing serious harm to a member of his or her own family. If that person has been further accused of violating the conditions already imposed by a court, the situation in that family is even more serious. I believe this amendment has the potential to protect people from those within their own household who seek to harm them.
Proposition 14: For
This proposal would allow judges who reach the mandatory retirement age of 75 years in the middle of a term to serve out the remainder of that term. Allowing such a judge to fill out the term ensures that the will of the voters who elected the judge is fulfilled. It also avoids the delays in justice caused by unnecessary judicial vacancies.
Proposition 15: For
This amendment would authorize $3 billion in bonds for the funding of the “Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas” and establish the institute’s management, duties, and powers. The potential to cure cancer is increasing every day. There is no reason that Texas shouldn’t be part of the effort, especially considering that the number of cancer deaths in Texas is one of the reasons we rank as low as 37 on the most recent list that evaluates the overall health of state populations.
Proposition 16: For
In the year 2007, is should be a source of great shame to Texans that some heavily populated parts of this state still don’t have sanitary sewer and water supply services. This amendment would allow for $250 million in spending to help alleviate this embarrassment.
Lampasas County Bond Proposition: For
As a high school student, I served on the committee that worked to restore our historic courthouse. Part of that effort was the construction of the county office building on the east side of the courthouse square. Back then, I strongly encouraged that we build a larger building than what we now have. Less than a decade later, we’re being asked to support bonds that would pay for the expansion of that building. I told you so.
This bond package will also pay for the construction of a new county jail. Almost no one disputes the necessity of a new jail. Anyone who does simply isn’t credible. The county has not gone about this process in the most desirable way, but we do seem to have a plan that allows for future growth, and that’s something Lampasas County has always been shortsighted on (as the need to expand our new county office building clearly illustrates). The proposal doesn’t make everybody happy, and it may not be the most efficient use of tax dollars, but it will eliminate the need for our sheriff’s deputies to be used as glorified transport workers and put those deputies back on the vital task of actually protecting the public.
First, I must report that someone is playing dirty pool with the elections in Fort Worth, Texas. Naturally, I suspect Republicans. After all, it's not the first time they've done it. It's not even the second.
With that ugliness now a little more exposed, my recommendations follow.
* * * * * * * * * *
Recommendations for the November 6, 2007, Constitutional Amendment and Bond Election
Proposition 1: For
Angelo State University has already been made a part of the Texas Tech University System by statute. This amendment reflects that change in the Constitution and prevents any potential funding delivery issues that might come with the university having an unclear system affiliation.
Proposition 2: For
Student loans are necessary in these days of unregulated college tuition in Texas. Unlike the other spending proposed in this election, this money will be mostly repaid by those who directly borrow it. The few defaults that may occur are worth the risk. Educated people tend to have better paying jobs. This means those people will likely pay more in the sales and property taxes that run our state. More importantly, a functional and healthy democracy requires an educated population.
Proposition 3: Against
This proposition gives the legislature broad powers to set caps on homestead property taxes. While such caps are often good, this proposition is not specific in how the legislature would arrive at the amount of the caps or what those amounts might be. The phrase “…or a greater percentage as determined by the legislature…” just isn’t clear enough for my liking.
Proposition 4: Against
This proposition would allow the state to issue up to $1 billion in bonds to pay for various pieces of infrastructure, including buildings and equipment for a number of state agencies. The agencies include the Parks and Wildlife Department; Department of the Adjutant General; Department of State Health Services; Department of Aging and Disability Services; Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired; Texas Youth Commission; Texas Historical Commission; Texas Department of Criminal Justice; Texas School for the Deaf; and the Texas Department of Public Safety. All of these are deserving agencies that could greatly benefit from the funds. Unfortunately, this proposition does not include any specific language on how the money should be spent. In other words, the recipient agencies could spend your tax dollars on almost anything. Additionally, the 2007 legislative session concluded with a state budget surplus. The expenditures covered by this proposition could have been paid for with that surplus money.
Proposition 5: Against
This would give small towns (those with a population less than 10,000, of which Lampasas is one) the power to grant property tax freezes for downtown business owners. In many small towns, the people running the local government are often also downtown business owners. The opportunity for favoritism and cronyism runs rampant with this proposal.
Proposition 6: For
This proposal allows for the legislature to exempt from the ad valorem tax one motor vehicle owned by an individual that he or she uses for both business and personal use. I see a lot of potential for abuse here, but I think that small business owners will likely benefit from this proposition. They are the backbone of our economy. Let’s hope this is used to give them a break.
Proposition 7: For
This proposal would allow landowners whose property is taken by the government through eminent domain to purchase that property back from the government at the same price the landowners were given when it was seized should the government decide to sell that property because it is not longer needed for public purposes. Currently, government can seize land and then sell it later on the open market at a higher price.
Proposition 8: For
This proposal makes several changes to the process by which home equity loans are made in Texas. Among the various changes proposed in the amendment are three I support. First, borrowers could take out a second loan on their home following the declaration of an emergency. This could allow borrowers to receive loans to rebuild their homes following a natural disaster. This might lead some borrowers to take on more loans than they can afford, but some degree of personal responsibility must be expected of people looking for such loans. Second, this proposal would also require that all fees and costs be disclosed at the closing of a loan. I believe such discretion is a good thing. Third, this proposal would also prohibit the use of preprinted checks for the use of unsolicited loan advances. I believe this offers borrowers some protection from more unscrupulous lenders.
Proposition 9: For
This amendment would allow for the legislature to exempt all or part of the market value of the homesteads of certain veterans from property taxes. Specifically, this exemption would apply to veterans who are certified to have a total (100%) service-connected disability. I believe that someone who has sacrificed their complete capabilities in the service of his or her country deserves this and so much more in return from their government.
Proposition 10: For
None of the 254 counties in Texas still employs an “Inspector of Hides and Animals” among their various county officers. This amendment would remove references to this obsolete office from the Constitution.
Proposition 11: For
This amendment would require the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate to make a recorded vote on the final passage of any bill not considered “local” or “ceremonial” in nature. This means that there would be a clear listing of how our elected officials voted on major pieces of legislation. The more opportunity we have to hold politicians’ feet to the fire, the better.
Proposition 12: Against
This would allow for up to $5 billion in bonds to be issued for highway projects. Unfortunately, there is no language that states specifically which projects would be funded. Also, there is no guarantee this money won’t be used on toll road projects. The Texas Department of Transportation is already spending tax dollars on political consultants and commercial advertising while telling the public that it doesn’t have money for new roads. Perhaps they should adjust their current spending before we allow them any more.
Proposition 13: For
This proposal would allow the legislature to grant judges the authority to deny bail to people accused of violating conditions of release and certain protective orders in family violence cases. Obviously, anyone involved in a family violence case has already been accused of causing serious harm to a member of his or her own family. If that person has been further accused of violating the conditions already imposed by a court, the situation in that family is even more serious. I believe this amendment has the potential to protect people from those within their own household who seek to harm them.
Proposition 14: For
This proposal would allow judges who reach the mandatory retirement age of 75 years in the middle of a term to serve out the remainder of that term. Allowing such a judge to fill out the term ensures that the will of the voters who elected the judge is fulfilled. It also avoids the delays in justice caused by unnecessary judicial vacancies.
Proposition 15: For
This amendment would authorize $3 billion in bonds for the funding of the “Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas” and establish the institute’s management, duties, and powers. The potential to cure cancer is increasing every day. There is no reason that Texas shouldn’t be part of the effort, especially considering that the number of cancer deaths in Texas is one of the reasons we rank as low as 37 on the most recent list that evaluates the overall health of state populations.
Proposition 16: For
In the year 2007, is should be a source of great shame to Texans that some heavily populated parts of this state still don’t have sanitary sewer and water supply services. This amendment would allow for $250 million in spending to help alleviate this embarrassment.
Lampasas County Bond Proposition: For
As a high school student, I served on the committee that worked to restore our historic courthouse. Part of that effort was the construction of the county office building on the east side of the courthouse square. Back then, I strongly encouraged that we build a larger building than what we now have. Less than a decade later, we’re being asked to support bonds that would pay for the expansion of that building. I told you so.
This bond package will also pay for the construction of a new county jail. Almost no one disputes the necessity of a new jail. Anyone who does simply isn’t credible. The county has not gone about this process in the most desirable way, but we do seem to have a plan that allows for future growth, and that’s something Lampasas County has always been shortsighted on (as the need to expand our new county office building clearly illustrates). The proposal doesn’t make everybody happy, and it may not be the most efficient use of tax dollars, but it will eliminate the need for our sheriff’s deputies to be used as glorified transport workers and put those deputies back on the vital task of actually protecting the public.
