Recommendations for the November 7th Texas Constitutional Amendments Election
October 23, 2023 | Austin, TX
A message from Texas Eagle Forum
Our elected officials are charged with keeping a budget that does not grow faster than the state using certain metrics. This should compel our legislators to look for waste and unnecessary spending while prioritizing where they must spend money. Rather than placing all spending in this budget, our legislators have asked you to vote to spend money off-budget.
Texas Eagle Forum believes necessary spending should always be included in our regular budget. Surplus money should be used for unexpected emergencies or returned to the taxpayers through lowering fees, or the state's portion of our sales tax.
As always, we hope you will spend some time doing your own analysis on these 14 Amendments to the Texas Constitution.
Recommendations
Texas Constitutional Amendments
November 7, 2023 Election
Proposition 1:
AGAINST
Proposition 2:
AGAINST
Proposition 3:
FOR
Proposition 4:
FOR
Proposition 5:
AGAINST
Proposition 6:
AGAINST
Proposition 7:
AGAINST
Proposition 8:
AGAINST
Proposition 9:
NEUTRAL, Leaning FOR
Proposition 10:
AGAINST
Proposition 11:
AGAINST
Proposition 12:
NEUTRAL
Proposition 13:
AGAINST
Proposition 14:
AGAINST
Proposition 1: AGAINST
HJR 126: “The constitutional amendment protecting the right to engage in farming, ranching, timber production, horticulture, and wildlife management.”
Texas already has a Right to Farm Statute. Prop. 1 may offer a little more protection to the few farmers located inside an overreaching city’s boundaries, but it also offers Big Agriculture (like Big Pharma and Big Tobacco) the right to harm.
America is losing her family farmers as farmland is being gobbled up by a few giant producers. Prop. 1’s biggest proponent touts their support of sustainability, reducing admissions, renewable fuels, and “climate-smart” efforts (while admitting that they purposely avoid the term “climate change”).
This is not a bill about small farms – it could serve to support the World Economic Forum’s efforts to control YOUR food and their 2030 Agenda. Oklahoma rejected this amendment a few years ago by 60+ percent.
Proponents are unfortunately using small farmers as the front for big agricultural conglomerates. Additionally, Texas Eagle Forum has seen evidence that this bill may be connected to the expansion of THC production (from hemp) in Texas - which we oppose.
Proposition 2: AGAINST
SJR 64: “The constitutional amendment authorizing a local option exemption from ad valorem taxation by a county or municipality of all or part of the appraised value of real property used to operate a child-care facility.”
This is corporate welfare that would require local taxpayers to pay for child-care facilities that already receive government subsidies.
Proposition 3: FOR
HJR 132: "The constitutional amendment prohibiting the imposition of an individual wealth or net worth tax, including a tax on the difference between the assets and liabilities of an individual or family.” - Texas families taxed too much.
Proposition 4: FOR
HJR 2 88(2): “The constitutional amendment to authorize the legislature to establish a temporary limit on the maximum appraised value of real property other than a residence homestead for ad valorem tax purposes; to increase the amount of the exemption from ad valorem taxation by a school district applicable to residence homesteads from $40,000 to $100,000; to adjust the amount of the limitation on school district ad valorem taxes imposed on the residence homesteads of the elderly or disabled to reflect increases in certain exemption amounts; to except certain appropriations to pay for ad valorem tax relief from the constitutional limitation on the rate of growth of appropriations; and to authorize the legislature to provide for a four-year term of office for a member of the board of directors of certain appraisal districts.”
This is better than nothing but most of the property tax relief will not be permanent.
Proposition 5: AGAINST
HJR 3: “The constitutional amendment relating to the Texas University Fund, which provides funding to certain institutions of higher education to achieve national prominence as major research universities and drive the state economy.”
$208,400,000 plus over $100,000,000 yearly Higher Ed gets plenty of support from taxpayers. This is a less transparent way to support trending indoctrination.
Proposition 6: AGAINST
SJR 75: “The constitutional amendment creating the Texas water fund to assist in financing water projects in this state.”
$1,000,000,000. This works against the free market and expands government control.
Proposition 7: AGAINST
SJR 93: “The constitutional amendment providing for the creation of the Texas energy fund to support the construction, maintenance, modernization, and operation of electric generating facilities.”
$5,000,000,000. We reluctantly lean AGAINST.
If this bill included dedicated grid protection against EMP, solar flare, and on-the-ground terrorism, we would fully support it. It appears to be mostly about low-interest rate loans to create more reliable energy sources but does not even require new facilities to be secure.
Proposition 8: AGAINST
HJR 125: “The constitutional amendment creating the broadband infrastructure fund to expand high-speed broadband access and assist in the financing of connectivity projects.”
$1,500,000,000. New tech will quickly make this “behind the times” and a corporate welfare fund. It creates a fund for off-budget and less transparent spending. It would be a big win for the lobbyists.
Proposition 9: NEUTRAL, Leaning FOR
HJR 2: “The constitutional amendment authorizing the 88th Legislature to provide a cost-of-living adjustment to certain annuitants of the Teacher Retirement System of Texas.”
$3,355,000,000.
Leaning FOR – Retired teachers have not had a cost-of-living increase in many years. Blame this spending on Biden’s inflation and economy.
Proposition 10: AGAINST
SJR 87: “The constitutional amendment to authorize the legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation equipment or inventory held by a manufacturer of medical or biomedical products to protect the Texas healthcare network and strengthen our medical supply chain.”
$79,000,000.
This is corporate welfare. Local taxpayers will pay 1/3 of the money lost to the companies, and statewide taxpayers will make up the other 2/3. Local taxpayers take a double hit.
Proposition 11: AGAINST
SJR 32: “The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit conservation and reclamation districts in El Paso County to issue bonds supported by ad valorem taxes to fund the development and maintenance of parks and recreational facilities.”
El Paso can already issue bonds for parks and recreational facilities. Creates new taxing authority. Fits the Biden 30x30 Land Grab objectives.
Proposition 12: NEUTRAL
HJR 134: “The constitutional amendment providing for the abolition of the office of county treasurer in Galveston County.”
The idea sounds good under the right elected officials. However, someday Galveston citizens may wish the person hired to do the duties of treasurer reported to them rather than be beholden to the Commissioners who hired him/her. This is a local issue that happens to be required in our Texas Constitution.
Proposition 13: AGAINST
HJR 107: “The constitutional amendment to increase the mandatory age of retirement for state justices and judges.”
Increases the age from 75 to 79 (older in some cases). There are plenty of qualified lawyers who would like to and be qualified to be elected/appointed as judges. Running against an incumbent judge can hurt an attorney’s future clients’ cases, so many are looking for an opening seat.
Proposition 14: AGAINST
SJR 74: “The constitutional amendment providing for the creation of the centennial parks conservation fund to be used for the creation and improvement of state parks.”
$1,000,000,000.
Land mass in Texas is not increasing while the population is growing. We need food more than we need parks. This is another Amendment that fits nicely in the Biden 30x30 Land Grab agenda.