Ballot Language:
The constitutional amendment authorizing the issuance of up to $1 billion in bonds payable from the general revenues of the state for maintenance, improvement, repair, and construction projects and for the purchase of needed equipment.
The state wants to sell bonds to build parks and prisons. To do a few repairs here and there. And in true sell it to the public fashion, they’ve thrown homeland security and asbestos abatement into the mix.
Americans for Prosperity opposes:
$57 million GR funds have been obligated to pay for debt service payments, and though many of the these projects appear deserving of some funding, with a state budget surplus, we should not be obligating bonds/future taxpayers to fund them.
The Texas Department of Transportation still has not drawn down $3 billion in bonds from a 2003 referendum.
Criminal justice blogger Scott Henson at Gritsforbreakfast also opposes:
It never ceases to amaze me that, although common stereotypes attribute anti-incarceration attitudes to liberals, the only people in the state with enough cojones to oppose new prisons or jails often are small-government conservatives like Venable or Judge Cynthia Kent in Tyler. By contrast, the so-called “liberal” pols are too often afraid of being called “soft on crime,” and with the election three weeks away I’m not aware of a single liberal group that’s come out against Prop #4.
BigJolly says: This one is pretty simple. Our state lawmakers want more money to spend and they don’t want to raise taxes with a huge surplus on hand. Nor do they want to spend the surplus because, as we all know, it is better for the state to have a bucket of money than it is for them to refund it to the taxpayers. So what do they want us to do? Pile more debt upon the backs of our children.
What is even more disturbing is that the Legislature didn’t even bother to tell the voters what the entire $1 BILLION would be spent on. They have outlined $717.3 million, leaving an astounding $282.7 MILLION at their discretion. Are the taxpayers of Texas this gullible?
Let’s stop the madness. Vote against this boondoggle.
Click to read comments for and against.
From the Texas Legislative Council Summary (note: 131 page pdf file):
Comments by Supporters: Supporters described the proposed amendment as providing for necessary projects for state infrastructure and homeland security. Projects included in the General Appropriations Act for the current state fiscal biennium, contingent on the approval of Senate Joint Resolution No. 65, include money for deferred maintenance and asbestos abatement generally, for courthouse renovations and historic sites, for state mental health hospitals, for mental health state schools, for maintenance at readiness centers for emergency response, for repairs and maintenance at the Texas National Guard’s Camp Mabry, for new state prison facilities and repair and rehabilitation of existing facilities, for a new regional office and crime lab in Lubbock for the Department of Public Safety, for Department of Public Safety crime lab expansions, for Department of Public Safety offices in McAllen and Rio Grande City, for construction of a new facility and at existing facilities of the Texas Youth Commission, and for the Parks and Wildlife Department for the Battleship Texas and for statewide park repairs.
Comments by Opponents: Some observers have noted that the chosen uses of the proposed bond proceeds have not been publicly reviewed and evaluated adequately to ensure that the uses fulfill valid needs of the state. In regard to prison spending, it has been claimed that additional prison facilities are not necessary and that the state currently has difficulty
maintaining adequate staff for prisons already constructed.
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
22 Responses to “November Ballot - Proposition 4”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
Vote No ……. ok got it. Will do!
We should all vote “NO” on every bond issue for a couple of years to force government into belt tighting and being more resourceful in funding their “pet” projects.
ok i’ll vote no but i have a question. is the people recommending this mostly republican or democrat?
dj25k,
The easiest way to answer that question is:
House:
Repubs - 81
Dems - 69
Senate:
Repubs - 20
Dems - 11
Lt. Gov:
Repub
Gov:
Repub
You know, 1 billion in bonds drawn over several years to do capital improvements and to repair capital assets seems to be well - great
You need to understand this in perspective - this puts the spending controlled as needed by the actual state entities (in other words no pet projects) and does not count towards the 5% cap on spending regardless of inflationary pressures and growth.
Unfortunately, we do have to repair things in Texas, and Texas I believe has the lowest bond debt of any state and despite bond passages and availability, Perry’s administration has been miserly in drawing down bonds.
*sigh*
but lets get the tax cutting fiscally prudent, socially conservative liberal democrats back in power
Eric,
Is it better to go into debt to repair your car or to pay with cash on hand?
Also BigJolly,
The state cannot legally refund sales taxes back to the taxpayers. Its also called an expenditure
this is what happens when you have a govenor who vetos 2.1 billion in spending already pased and growth adds billions more.
But refunding (even if it passed the courts) would be an expenditure.
Surpluses are dangerous in Texas because of caps, democrats, crazy ways of determining spending limits, and the fact that the state is totally obligated by the courts for all local obligations.
This is what you get when a bunch of inebriated Democrats write a constitution
BigJolly
the surplus is like a trust, you have to specially appropriate it in texas and remove something else
Its like borrowing money from your Parents, they make you give up an equal amount of something else to repair your car
like Gasoline or insurance
we had a liberal democrat (Republican) Many names as comptroller - (this is the last of her projections) who always deliberately underprojected growth to force the Republicans into conflict with the local governments and to take unjutified credit for the surplus.
Now, you can be of two thoughts on this - hey lets have a comptroller who reports half the revenue thats going to be raised, and we have even further spending cuts or can we project it accurately and perhaps give huge property tax relief
choose the first one (which you are advocating here)
Then watch your local taxes go through the roof……….
Its a convoluted system in Texas, the constitution was written as to actually put the projections in the hands of the comptroller who reports to the LBB.
So really, its the comptroller who controls Texas and Rylander did with an iron fist
Hence the debt, hence the high property taxes
I really did try to figure out your answer to my question. Do you think it is a good thing to go further into debt to repair your car or to spend the money that is in your pocket?
I thought this story looked familiar. I remember reading it here…
http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2007/10/conservative-group-opposing-prison.html
cause it was linked here…
http://talkintexas.com/
Wheres the hat tip?
Bannable, There is an easy way to fix the refund issue, (which by the way is not what we are talking about here). That is, have the Legislature mandate that State accounting conform to GAP. Then refunds can be categorized as over-payments which do not count as an expense, but as an offset on the Income Statement. As far as the bond issue, if someone is mis-managing the money they have, which it is arguable the State is doing, do you then approve a loan for them?
BigJolly
In answer to your question
You cannot pas that many spending bills on 100’s of small projects without compromise.
Think about it, do we have 21 republican senators, no.
Do you think, lets say Dans buddy Whitmire would say “sure Dan I’ll let you vote on a list of needed repairs” without anything from the dems? - no.
But offer them a billion dollars in debt - they’ll vote for it all the time.
And it takes the funds out of the hands of future legislators as it is legally binding and the interest only accrues when actually drawn, so the chances of pork being much higher than interest approach absolution.
In other words why let the dems spend 3.5 billion to repair 920 million dollars worth of infrastructure in Texas
But thats okay lets vote against it and not fix anything
Eric,
You do not think that an agency should budget for MO&R?
Not even addressing unneeded prison building.
DuhMoose - you hit the problem on the head
State accounting conforms to GAAP
Also point out in GAAP the acceptable methodology for forecasting 2 year revenues within the 99% accuracy range that the taxpayer wants taking in the global economy, oil futures, wars, terrorism, political instability and elections?
Cause it doesn’t exist.
Its funny, Texas always overprojected revenues forcing tax increases during the 70, 80, 90’s small ones but they were there.
Then with Perry, even with deliberate underprojections - the state has booming surpluses
Go figure
14
Yep….
I answered yes BigJolly cause to save the Texans from Dems they have to give a little to save alot.
Daniel,
Although the thrust of the post was quite different than Scott’s, I did quote and link to his blog about it.
That’s an interesting way to put it.
#4 bigjolly i was being sarcastic.
What part of “no MAS” do these thieves in Austin not understand?
Show me some efficiency (even a smidge!)before you ask for one more DIME of my cash!
Jolly, isn’t it 80/70 (R/D) in the House after Kirk England flipped? Of course, your number would be correct for those who passed the budget.
There was money for all this stuff and more available, just to have mentioned it, but they sunk it into tax cuts. I don’t mind the tax relief, but not paired with massive borrowing schemes. That just means we pay more in the future. They’re taking a lesson from the Washington D.C. Rs - instead of tax and spend, the new mantra is cut taxes and borrow.
I guess they figure, as John Maynard Keynes said, “In the long run, we’re all dead.”