Tag Archives: Texas Constitution

What’s to love about Texas Constitution?

I hate the Texas Constitution.

Don’t misunderstand. It’s not that it stands for evil intent.

My problem with it is that it so damn archaic and nonsensical.

Consider one of the measures Texans voted on this past Tuesday. It involved whether we here in the Panhandle, or in East Texas, or the Hill Country, or the Trans-Pecos, or the upper Gulf Coast should vote on a tax measure involving the Hidalgo County Hospital District.

The measure passed, as did all nine of the constitutional amendment proposals the Texas Legislature tossed in our laps. Some of them actually mattered, such as Prop 6, which sets up a fund to pay for water development projects across the state. The drought-ravaged Panhandle can use that kind of help from the state.

Back to the Hidalgo County Hospital District. I didn’t bother to vote on that one. Why? I don’t care about tax rates involving a hospital district about 500 miles from here. If we lived on the East Coast, it’d be three, maybe four, states away.

I get why the state’s founders set up a Constitution this way. They wanted to spread power to as many folks as possible. They hated centralization and didn’t want to copy the federal constitutional model. Heck, they partitioned the state into 254 counties, for crying out loud; one of them, Loving County, is populated by all of 71 residents.

If the idea, then, was to create an environment for greater local control, why did they set up a Constitution that requires all Texans to vote on things that have no bearing on their lives? Remember when the entire state had to decide whether to let tiny Roberts County just northeast of Amarillo let go of its hide inspector’s office?

Some issues ought to be a totally local matter and don’t have to involve the rest of the state.

I would ask the Legislature to change the document to make it more modern and make more sense.

Except that such a request will go nowhere. The hidebound traditionalists who populate the Legislature will have none of it.

Get ready, therefore, to vote in two years for issues that will have you scratching your head.

Prop 6 looks like a water winner for state

Texas’ Legislature was kind to voters this election year by giving us “only” nine amendments to the Texas Constitution to consider.

One of them is of huge importance to the Panhandle. It’s Proposition 6, the “water amendment.”

I plan to vote for it.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/10/22/guest-column-vote-yes-prop-6-we-need-water/

Gov. Rick Perry’s column attached here tells us that the amendment would allow the state to tap into its Rainy Day Fund — which is a rather ironic twist, if you think about it — to develop water resources for the state.

Perry writes: “Our booming economy, rapidly growing population and the drought that has plagued most of the state for years are combining to stress our ability to meet our water demands. If we do nothing to address these needs, we place at risk the health and well-being of future generations.”

The Rainy Day Fund, Perry and other supporters note, won’t be imperiled. There will remain plenty of money left in the fund to use for other “emergencies.” By my way of thinking, I believe the state’s water shortage constitutes an emergency, particularly in regions of the state that have so little of it. That means the Panhandle.

Perry adds, “Because of our economic strength, the Rainy Day Fund has reached historic highs. Even with a one-time transfer of funds to address our water needs, we’ll still have an estimated $8.3 billion in reserve.”

Debra Medina, the tea party darling who ran for governor in 2010, opposes it. Her essay is attached here:

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/10/22/guest-column-vote-no-prop-6/

Of the two, Perry’s makes more sense. Proposition 6 is a reasonable approach to spending money the state has on hand to fend off actual emergencies.

A world without water? That constitutes a dire circumstance.