Officeholders should live in capital
The Texas Constitution has been amended 484 times since it took effect in 1876. Seven new proposed amendments are on the Nov. 3 ballot, with early voting set to end Friday. Our 500th amendment is only another election cycle or two away!
We’ve already weighed in on the two most significant constitutional initiatives on this year’s ballot, recommending voters support Proposition 1, which raises the school property tax homestead exemption from $15,000 to $25,000, and Proposition 7, which dedicates $2.5 billion of state sales tax revenue to road construction.
We also encouraged voters to approve Proposition 2, which exempts all spouses of deceased veterans who were 100 percent disabled from homestead taxes.
Our quick take on the remaining four propositions:
Proposition 3
Voters pass most proposed amendments, but this is one they should reject.
Proposition 3 would remove from the Texas Constitution the historical requirement that statewide officeholders live in Austin. The proposed constitutional permission to live outside the state capital wouldn’t apply to the governor, Texas Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeals justices — they still would be required to reside here — but the attorney general, comptroller and agriculture, land and railroad commissioners could put Austin in their rearview mirrors.
Republican state Sen. Donna Campbell of New Braunfels, the initiative’s sponsor, says technology has rendered the residency requirement obsolete. Not really. An effective state leader doesn’t work in isolation — and however wonderful technology is, there is no substitute for being where an agency’s work is actually getting done or where the political action is.
Austin is the seat of state government, and it is here that officeholders elected statewide should live.
Proposition 4
This amendment would authorize the Legislature to allow the charitable foundations of the Dallas Cowboys, San Antonio Spurs, Houston Astros and other professional sports teams in Texas to sell raffle tickets, with half of raffle sales set aside for prizes and half going to a worthy cause. Well, 50-50 of what’s left after the foundation takes up to 10 percent of gross receipts to cover the cost of running the raffle.
If you’re going to allow such raffles, why limit them to sports foundations? But we see no reason to muster a harrumph against the proposition. There are charitable benefits to it after all.
Proposition 5
The Texas Constitution currently allows sparsely populated counties — those with 5,000 residents or fewer — to use public equipment and resources to build and maintain private roads as long as they charge a reasonable fee for the work. Apparently, private road contractors are hard to find in small, rural counties. Proposition 5 would move the population ceiling to 7,500. It would apply to about 20 of the state’s 254 counties. So say yes to slightly expanding what already is allowed.
Proposition 6
Every constitutional referendum is marked by one or two important initiatives, several others that are worth a meh at best, and at least one that merely contributes to the bloat that subjects the Texas Constitution to derision. Proposition 6, which would recognize “the right of the people to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife subject to laws that promote wildlife conservation,” fills that role during this constitutional election.
Proposition 6 would constitutionally enshrine activities already protected by the state. It’s driven by the same paranoia that, over the past 20 years, has prompted the average gun owner to double the number of guns he owns — the unfounded fear that the government not only is poised to take away Texans’ guns, but also is ready to ban hunting and fishing.
We’re not against hunting or fishing. And since Proposition 6 doesn’t diminish state or municipal laws governing trespassing or property rights, or block rules against firing weapons inside city limits, we consider it as harmless as it is unnecessary. Vote for it if you feel you must.