The 11 Proposed Amendments to the Texas Constitution


 
More Legislative Bullshit

The 11 Proposed Amendments to the Texas Constitution
 


20 October 2009 at 3:28:13 PM
pstern

 

 
A few quick notes to Texans:
 
I will vote for none of these, just as I have not voted for previous proposed amendments of 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 times 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 statewide political and legislative system.
 
I recommend voting "No" on each of these 11 items and 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; however, it is up to Texans to send a message to their legislators to fix the constitution and quit adding-on to it.
 
 
---


Permalink
     Views: 7625 
Latest Blog Post by pstern -Who funds ISIS?
Comments!  
1 - Anonymous   21 Oct 2009 @ 12:57:25 AM 

I can't remember when I last voted for an ammendment.  I agree with poster.  These amendments are always put on the ballot during "off year" election, so the narrow minded special interest can muster enough votes to pass these by and large dumb things.  And also remember if an election is on the ballot--If they're in, they're out!  If one is unopposed, then don't vote for that person.  Our politicians need to get to work for the ordinary citizens.  Now they are all bought off by O&G, insurance, power generating and other corporate interests.



2 - humanbeing   21 Oct 2009 @ 7:25:06 AM 

I agree, pstern. Usually the amendments are presented in language that is incomprehensible and always have some hidden agenda. I found #11 particularly strange in that it completely contradicts itself:

"The constitutional amendment to prohibit the taking, damaging, or destroying of private property for public use unless the action is for the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property by the State, a political subdivision of the State, the public at large, or entities granted the power of eminent domain under law or for the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property, but not for certain economic development or enhancement of tax revenue purposes, and to limit the legislature's authority to grant the power of eminent domain to an entity."

 


Latest Blog Post by humanbeing -State Department Admits It Doesn't Know Keystone XL's Exact Route
3 - humanbeing   21 Oct 2009 @ 8:26:47 AM 

Just rec'd an email from CorridorWatch.org recommending a 'yes' vote on amendment 11, saying that it WILL help protect private property from imminent domain.  I'm not convinced. This is an important issue. Any thoughts on this? 


Latest Blog Post by humanbeing -State Department Admits It Doesn't Know Keystone XL's Exact Route
4 - salon   21 Oct 2009 @ 10:08:13 AM 

The troublesome language, to me, is where it talks about urban blight. We just got done watching the PBS New York series and saw where there were some wonderful old neighborhoods and Penn Station taken down because of *urban blight*. Also, why can't it just stop with the public at large and not have an OR.


Latest Blog Post by salon -Audio- Somervell County Water District Meeting - April 20, 2017
5 - humanbeing   21 Oct 2009 @ 6:43:11 PM 

All of the language disturbs me. I want to support legislation that protects private property from eminent domain but this has so many exceptions. I realize that these amendments are just the starting point for legislative definition of the issue but I've become paranoid about voting for any of them. The voter just isn't given enough information. 


Latest Blog Post by humanbeing -State Department Admits It Doesn't Know Keystone XL's Exact Route
6 - pstern   23 Oct 2009 @ 2:18:29 PM 

Amendment 11 does nothing to ensure the protection of eminent domain for homeowners.

A few years ago Perry had the chance to approve a bill that provided homeowners with REAL compensation for land taken from them.  He refused to sign it.  It is obvious that Perry and most legislators do NOT want us to be protected from eminent domain.

Time to get rid of Perry once and for all.  It can only help the rest of us move forward.


Latest Blog Post by pstern -Who funds ISIS?
7 - humanbeing   24 Oct 2009 @ 9:51:37 PM 

Here's a clip from an email from corridorwatch.org (a source I relied upon heavily in gaining information about the Trans Texas Corridor and one I trust):

"Here's what the author of HJR-14 has to say about the legislative intent of the Proposition 11 amendment: 
 
HJR 14 - STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT

It is the intent of the legislature that HJR 14 end the practice of governmental and quasi-governmental entities using the power of eminent domain to take land from private individuals to facilitate the private development and redevelopment of property. Such practices represent a harm to the citizens of the State of Texas. This amendment was passed in response to the United States Supreme Court s' decision in Kelo v City of New London, which held that eminent domain for private development is consistent with the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The use of eminent domain in the Kelo case is inconsistent with the intent and meaning of Article I, Section 17 of the Texas Constitution and inconsistent with this amendment.
 
This amendment is further intended to restrict the ability of local governments to condemn property for the purpose of eliminating urban blight by only allowing condemnation on a parcel-by-parcel basis, and based only upon the presence of dangerous conditions on the property that represent a genuine threat to the public health, safety, and welfare (urban blight). This amendment is intended to restrict, and in no way expand, the eminent domain authority of condemning entities. It is the intent of the legislature that the terms of this amendment shall be construed in favor of its purpose to protect private property from condemnation.

- Representative Frank Corte"

  


Latest Blog Post by humanbeing -State Department Admits It Doesn't Know Keystone XL's Exact Route
 You! Leave a Comment! You Know you Want To!
You must be a registered member to comment on the blog.
Your first post is held pending approval to make sure you're not a spammer bot

 Not registered? Or you can login!

LOGON - Name:Password:

New poster comments are moderated, meaning they won't show up until approved... or not.  Be patient-we have lives outside this blog, so it might take awhile You want to be rude? totally stupid? inappropriate? Racist? Bigoted? Flame war baiter? Your post may be deleted. Spammers or people posting pretend interest comments but really wanting to hawk their latest book or sell stuff or govt propaganda flacks won't see their posts published. Comments do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the site owner(salon).
If you have a problem with logging in or registering, please speak up right away. Love your comments. Oh, except spammers
More on commenting



Click Here for Main Page

Latest Posts

Audio- Somervell County Water District Meeting - April 20, 2017
salon 4/29/2017

Making Fun of Donald Trump on his 100 day baloney
salon 4/29/2017

So... Somervell County Hospital District wants to know about pending litigation (April 2017)
salon 4/29/2017

Hey, *CapNRon*, Ron Hankins, DO YOUR JOB and QUIT BEING A HYPOCRITE!
salon 4/29/2017

Video-Somervell County Hospital District Regular Meeting March 30, 2017
salon 4/29/2017

Hahah, Trump thought being president would be easier than his old life
salon 4/29/2017




Comments

salon > 4/3/2017-Update on the American Humanist Assoc vs Birdville ISD case. In March 2017 - A federal appeals court on Monday said a Texas school board may open its meetings with student-led prayers with.... (Religious News and Notes from the Distaff Side - 5/14/2016)

salon > Incidentally, nobody ran against Hankins, so sad to say there will be election this year.  (Updated for 2017Why I Will Not Vote for Ron Hankins, if he runs, to be on the Somervell County Hospital Board (prev 2015))

salon > Adding a great article from Texas Tribune "In courthouse turf war, Texas counties rally against statewide court records portal". The Texas Supreme Court, through its Office of Court Adm.... (Regarding Re:SearchTX and Somervell County (Glen Rose))

salon > @Sassy wonder why. If you know, email me  (GRMC Employee Spent Stolen Church Money on $20,000 Florida Vacation)













Home | Blog Home | About | News | Piazza | Calendar | Audio/Video/Open Rec | Search
Write!  |profile | quotes |
top Daily | top Weekly |top Month | top Year | Top All! | archives | subscribe RSS