Reply #2: VOTE NO ACROSS THE BOARD [View All]

[Czolgosz]

Here is the Austin Chronicle's analysis:

Proposition 1: No.

Create the Texas Rail Relocation and Improvement Fund. This is yet another attempt by the state to underwrite the expenses of private industry – in this case, the relocation of major rail lines that are either getting crowded by urban growth or else figure in Gov. Perry's grandiose plans for the Trans-Texas Corridor. We say let the railroads pay their own way.
Proposition 2: No!

Prohibit gay marriage or civil unions. This is the most outrageous proposition on the ballot, the most direct assault on human rights and privacy rights, and the most blatant attempt to write bigotry into the Texas Constitution since the Civil War. We need every one of you to get out on election day and vote to prevent the state of Texas from joining this march in the modern History of Infamy.
Proposition 3: No.

Clarify that certain economic development programs do not constitute a debt." Prop. 3 has a local hook – Save Our Springs Alliance won a lawsuit against the Village of Bee Cave to stop the municipal underwriting of a shopping center to subsidize a private developer without even a mechanism established to do so. The Lege wants voters to ratify any and all such arrangements, yet the ballot language is so vague it should be rejected on those grounds alone.
Proposition 4: No.

Authorize denial of bail to a criminal defendant who violates a condition of release. This is a solution in search of a problem, and drafted in such vague language that even those who might support it should pause. There are other ways of dealing with this issue than by writing yet more specific legal exemptions into the state constitution, including a higher bail – not denying altogether such a basic protection against unjust imprisonment.
Proposition 5: No.

Allow the Legislature to define rates of interest for commercial loans. The Lege is worried that poor Texas bankers are not able to charge more than 10% interest (currently defined as usury) on commercial loans, as they can in 46 other states, and are selling the amendment as aimed only at "sophisticated commercial borrowers." This is a foot-in-the-door amendment to give the banks whatever they want and undermine the anti-usury limits altogether.
Proposition 6: No.

Add two additional members to the State Commission on Judicial Conduct. The ballot language doesn't say that the amendment would also eliminate geographic representation on the commission, in theory allowing the greater packing of the commission. It probably doesn't matter whether the commission has 11 or 13 members, since judges virtually have to commit blatant public felonies to be subject to disciplinary action; we doubt seriously that adding a couple of commissioners will do much about that institutional problem.
Proposition 7: No.

Authorize line-of-credit advances under a reverse mortgage. Like Prop. 5, Prop. 7 is a gift to the bankers under the guise of helping creditors, in this case retired homeowners (over 62) whose only asset is their home. This amendment would create "lines of credit" to draw down smaller loan advances that often look reasonable but can quickly accumulate into heavy debt burdens – a circumstance ripe for abuse. Why make it easier to fleece small homeowners?
Proposition 8: No.

Relinquish any state claim to certain land in Upshur and Smith counties. Title to several thousand acres in the two counties was under dispute because of apparent vacancies in land surveys. The General Land Office has already relinquished claim to the bulk of the land, but another 950 acres remain in court. The constitution shouldn't be a handy bludgeon to settle complicated land disputes.
Proposition 9: No.

Six-year terms for RMA board members. The Lege allowed six-year terms for regional mobility authorities, but anti-toll warriors won a ruling that the constitution prohibits terms of more than two years. The only way for voters to voice their general opposition to tolls is to vote against this amendment and Prop. 1 (the railroad subsidy amendment).



Here's Democratic AG candidate David Van Os's analysis:

The Constitutional Amendments - Just Vote NO

Early voting starts October 24 on the Texas Constitutional Amendments. There are nine proposed amendments. I recommend a vote of NO on all nine. Consider the source. These amendments were generated by one of the most special interest-dominated legislatures in the history of our state. Every one of the proposed amendments serves a Perry-Craddick special interest -- be it banks and big corporations, Rick Perry's political ambitions, or the so-called religious right (which is really the unreligious wrong).

Concerning Proposition 2: I don't like the phrase "religious right." The protagonists of the so-called "religious right" are not in accord with most of the world's great religions and they are certainly not right. It is neither "religious" nor "right" to seek the destruction of our great democracy's Constitutional checks and balances; nor is it either "religious" or "right" to stir up hatred and prejudice against fellow citizens for the purpose of political grandstanding. Thus I prefer to call these purveyors of hate the unreligious wrong.

The authors of Proposition 2 seek blatantly to involve the power of government in matters of religion. Freedom of Worship is one of the bedrock Four Freedoms identified by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in one of democracy's darkest hours, when our cherished and fundamental democratic values were under attack from the evil worldviews of Nazism and fascism in World War II. Our nation's Founders saw clearly that freedom of religion cannot flourish unless government is equally neutral and impartial toward all religions and religious beliefs or non-beliefs; otherwise different religious beliefs and non-beliefs will fall prey to passing political winds of governmental favoritism and disfavoritism, and the freedom of worship will not be free. Whether a Supreme Being or a religious scripture recognizes or condemns same-sex marriage is a debate that belongs in religious halls, not in the framing of a Constitutional Bill of Rights that is the equal birthright of every citizen.

Furthermore, the Radical Republican Caucus that masqueraded as the State Legislature last session is so incompetent it cannot even do a good job of pursuing its own anti-democratic objectives. The wording of Proposition 2 calls for "prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage." Did you get that? The proposed Constitutional amendment will prohibit the state from recognizing any legal status identical to marriage. In its eagerness to enshrine hate into our Constitution, the unreligious wrong has placed before the citizens of Texas a proposition to prohibit the state from recognizing any marriage. It just goes to show you that hate cannot beget anything but bad ideas and bad consequences.

Propositions 1 and 9 are on the ballot to speed up the Perry Government's rush to put higher profits into the bank accounts of private developers at the taxpayers' expense, through the public subsidization of privately owned and operated transportation facilities by the actions of un-elected developers' cronies. Proposition 3 would allow local governments to spend even more of the taxpayers' money on boondoggles to reward campaign contributors. Proposition 5 would be a dream come true for banks, by removing any caps on the amounts of interest they could charge for commercial loans, making it easier for them to increase the squeeze on small businesses. Proposition 7 would give banks another tool in their already large arsenal of ways to entice homeowners to indenture their homes. Propositions 4, 6, and 8 appear to serve narrow interests. Just vote NO.