Vote shuns the burden of Austin residency

Head-exploding traffic, hair-melting summer heat, wallet-wilting housing costs and alternating floods and droughts aside, Austin is a pretty good place to live. Why, then, would a statewide elected official not want to live where he or she works?

It’s such a good idea that the framers of our 1876 Texas Constitution made it mandatory by stating that state-wides must “reside at the Capital of the State during his continuance in office.” (Back then “his” covered the entire universe of potential officeholders.)

Makes sense. Work here, live here. But, thanks to a lastchance, narrow-vote margin in the House this week, you, dear voter, are being asked to repeal that provision.

Senate Joint Resolution 52 won 29-1 Senate OK in April. On Monday, the House voted 94-46 for SJR 52, advancing it to a final vote but falling short of the 100 votes needed for approval of a proposed constitutional amendment. On Wednesday, it won 102-44 approval.

Sponsoring Rep. John Otto, R-Dayton, opened the debate Monday by noting “this requirement has been in the Constitution since its adoption in 1876 when people came here by horseback.” Rep. Tom Craddick, R-Midland and the House dean who was a mere lad when that Constitution was adopted, rose to challenge Otto.

“Mr. Otto,” he said, “what I don’t understand is our statewide elected officials are elected to serve as a full-time job, is that correct? If you pass your constitutional amendment these people can live in Houston, Midland, Wichita Falls or wherever. And so how are they going to be at work every day?”

Otto: “With the transportation system we have today, it’s not a problem for statewide officials to be here every day.”

Craddick: “I think you’re going to have all the different statewide officeholders living all over the state and maybe they’re here one day a month and maybe they’re here one day a week. I think this is a bad bill.”

The debate continued Tuesday as Dems were killing time trying to kill other bills further down the agenda. Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin, acknowledging that some folks disparagingly think of Austin as “The People’s Republic of Travis County,” failed with an amendment to require statewide officeholders to live in the five-county Austin metro area. Craddick

failed with one to require them to live within 50 miles of Austin.

On Wednesday, as the final vote approached, Otto sought sympathy for common folks who aspire to statewide office.

“Anyone that lives here knows what the price of housing in Austin is. Do you not think it’s a disservice for people that want to run for statewide office?” Otto asked.

It is worth noting the Constitution does bar statewide officeholders from living in, for example, Pflugerville or Round Rock. That’s why Howard’s five-county amendment seemed to make sense. The House, by a 98-48 margin, didn’t think so.

So what’s behind this effort? Rep. Chris Turner, D-Grand Prairie, during the Tuesday debate, said he had an idea.

“Some concerns have been raised to me that this essentially is another way that elected officials can establish residency somewhere else to the extent that they may get in trouble at some point and those prosecutions would be in venues that they think are more favorable to them,” he told Otto.

Under current law,

Five-county amendment seemed to make sense. The House ... didn’t think so.

statewide elected officials who are required to live here are prosecuted here if they get in trouble. Republicans, you may have heard, are not happy about that. It’s that People’s Republic of Travis County thing.

Moving separately through the Legislature in the session’s closing days is a GOP-backed effort to allow accused lawmakers to be prosecuted in their hometowns and statewide officials to be prosecuted where they lived prior to being required to live in Austin.

Otto assured Turner that SJR 92 has nothing to do with where a statewide could be prosecuted. “It is to allow a statewide officeholder to decide where they want to reside as long as they can carry out their duties that they’ve been elected to perform,” he said.

Looks like you’re going to get the final word on the Nov. 3 ballot.