Texas’ Seven Constitutional Amendment’s

Corridor News is breaking down the seven Texas Constitutional Amendments that will be on Texas ballots in November. We have included links to printable PFD’s on all seven proposed amendments at the bottom of this aricle.

The Texas House Research Organization prepared a “focus report” from the Texas House of Representatives on July 30, 2015, and it will give you a complete explanation of each proposition and includes the thoughts of the supporters AND opponents on each amendment.

Corridor News hopes this will allow our readers a chance to understand each of the seven propositions, along with both sides, and the ballot language, which is not always understandable and can be confusing to some.

Texas voters have approved 484 amendments to the state Constitution since its adoption in 1876, according to the Legislative Reference Library. Seven more proposed amendments will be submitted for voter approval at the general election on Tuesday, November 3, 2015.

The Texas Legislature proposes constitutional amendments in joint resolutions that originate in either the House of Representatives or the Senate. For example, Proposition 1 on the November 3, 2015, ballot was proposed by Senate Joint Resolution (SJR) 1, introduced by Sen. Jane Nelson and sponsored in the House by Rep. Dennis Bonnen. Art. 17, sec. 1 of the Texas Constitution requires that a joint resolution be adopted by at least a two-thirds vote of the membership of each house of the Legislature (100 votes in the House, 21 votes in the Senate) to be presented to voters. The governor cannot veto a joint resolution.

Amendments may be proposed in either regular or special sessions. A joint resolution includes the text of the proposed constitutional amendment and specifies an election date. The secretary of state conducts a random drawing to assign each proposition a ballot number if more than one proposition is being considered.

If voters reject an amendment proposal, the Legislature may resubmit it. For example, the voters rejected a proposition authorizing $300 million in general obligation bonds for college student loans at an August 10, 1991, election, then approved an identical proposition at the November 5, 1991, election after the Legislature readopted the proposal and resubmitted it in essentially the same form.

The ballot wording of a proposition is specified in the joint resolution adopted by the Legislature, which has broad discretion concerning the wording. In rejecting challenges to the ballot language for proposed amendments, the courts generally have ruled that ballot language is sufficient if it describes the proposed amendment with such definiteness and certainty that voters will not be misled and if it allows a voter of average intelligence to distinguish one proposition from another on the ballot. The courts have assumed that voters become familiar with the proposed amendments before reaching the polls and that they do not decide how to vote solely on the basis of the ballot language.

The Legislature may call an election for voter consideration of proposed constitutional amendments on any date, as long as election authorities have enough time to provide notice to the voters and print the ballots. In recent years, most proposals have been submitted at the November general election held in odd-numbered years.

Texas Constitution, Art. 17, sec. 1 requires that a brief explanatory statement of the nature of each proposed amendment, along with the ballot wording for each, be published twice in each newspaper in the state that prints official notices. The first notice must be published 50 to 60 days before the election. The second notice must be published on the same day of the following week. Also, the secretary of state must send a complete copy of each amendment to each county clerk, who must post it in the courthouse at least 30 days before the election.

The secretary of state prepares the explanatory statement, which must be approved by the attorney general, and arranges for the required newspaper publication. The estimated total cost of publication twice in newspapers across the state for the November 3 election is $118,681, according to the Legislative Budget Board.

 Some constitutional amendments are self-enacting and require no additional legislation to implement their provisions. Other amendments grant discretionary authority to the Legislature to enact legislation in a particular area or within certain guidelines. These amendments require “enabling” legislation to fill in the details of how the amendment would operate. The Legislature often adopts enabling legislation in advance, making the effective date of the legislation contingent on voter approval of a particular amendment. If voters reject the amendment, the legislation dependent on the constitutional change does not take effect.

Effective date Constitutional amendments take effect when the official vote canvass confirms statewide majority approval, unless a later date is specified. Statewide election results are tabulated by the secretary of state and must be canvassed by the governor 15 to 30 days following the election.

https://smcorridornews.com/pdf/november-2015-ballot-proposed-amendments.pdf

Prop 1: https://smcorridornews.com/pdf/november-2015-ballot-1st-proposed-amendment.pdf

Prop 2: https://smcorridornews.com/pdf/november-2015-ballot-2nd-proposed-amendment.pdf
Prop 3: https://smcorridornews.com/pdf/november-2015-ballot-3rd-proposed-amendment.pdf
Prop 4: https://smcorridornews.com/pdf/november-2015-ballot-4th-proposed-amendment.pdf
Prop 5: https://smcorridornews.com/pdf/november-2015-ballot-5th-proposed-amendment.pdf
Prop 6: https://smcorridornews.com/pdf/november-2015-ballot-6th-proposed-amendment.pdf
Prop 7: https://smcorridornews.com/pdf/november-2015-ballot-7th-proposed-amendment.pdf