State props, part 1

Texas Constitution changes: Voters should support Proposition 1 and oppose 2 and 3.

There are few political documents more elegant and refined than the U.S. Constitution. And there are few more convoluted and rambling than the Texas version — only Alabama and Oklahoma have longer state constitutions.

Voters are being asked to consider seven amendments to our document on the November ballot, all of which had to be approved by two-thirds of the Legislature during the spring session. These amendments offer minor changes and, unlike in past years, there’s no major opposition or debate. Nevertheless, we cast a skeptical eye on these offers by the legislative supermajority, and ask voters to do the same.

State of Texas, Proposition 1: For

This amendment would allow the Legislature to exempt partially disabled veterans and surviving spouses from paying property taxes on a home received from a charity at less than the market value. An exemption has already been granted when homes are given for free, and this opens the door to some cost sharing.

Voters should be frustrated that the legislative analysis does not estimate the eventual cost of this tax cut — you will have to wait for the actual bill. Nor do we need more holes poked into our already broken property tax system, which will shift the burden onto other homeowners.

But these Texans sacrificed their bodies for our national defense, and they and their spouses deserve to live without worry of losing their homes to tax bills that bear little relation to what folks can actually afford.

The Legislature should be working to ensure that everyone can share in that piece of mind.

State of Texas, Proposition 2: Against

Consider it a form of post-traumatic stress. Any time banks ask for looser rules, we get flashbacks to the 2008 economic crisis. Financial institutions granted bad loans, good loans — some even made fake loans — knowing that the instruments would eventually be wrapped into a package and sold off. If the debt went bust, some other sucker would be stuck holding the bomb.

The global economic system ended up as the big loser in that game of hot potato.

Now the Texas Legislature is asking voters to tear down some regulations that help keep lenders in line. We recommend voting against.

We’ve yet to hear a convincing reason to change the state’s status quo on homeequity borrowing. Why should certain fees be exempted from a cap on costs? Why should lenders be allowed to grant advances on a home equity line of credit on an over-leveraged loan? Why should Texas permit the refinancing of home equity loans into another sort of loan that still has a lien on property but offers fewer consumer protections?

All these alterations seem designed to shift the balance away from homeowners and towards the banks — away from caution and towards recklessness.

State of Texas, Proposition 3: Against

The governor selects hundreds of unpaid appointees to serve on state boards and commissions, most of which run for four- or six-year terms. But if the term expires and no replacement is appointed, that volunteer is allowed under the state’s “holdover” provision to remain until the slot is filled. This amendment to the state Constitution would force out the incumbents even if there’s no new appointees and render the positions vacant.

We have no quarrel with the current “holdover” rule and recommend voting against.

Altering this system risks turning appointed positions into tug-of-wars between interest groups or proxy battles for greater political fights. For example, after the lobbying outfit Empower Texans ran afoul of the Texas Ethics Commission, the group tried to pressure the governor into replacing qualified commissioners whose terms had expired.

Keeping those holdovers offers a sense of stability. The last thing Texans need are empty seats or more opportunity for political chaos.