Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Texas
Related: About this forumCommittee Hears Bill to Allow Ken Paxton to Toss Local Ballot Initiatives
http://www.texasobserver.org/committee-hears-bill-to-allow-ken-paxton-to-toss-local-ballot-initiatives/In recent years, referenda and ballot initiatives have grown in importance as ways for Texans to enact change and hold local governments accountable. The most notable recent example is a ban on hydraulic fracturing in Denton, which passed a fairly conservative electorate by a wide margin. The Denton ban was the subject of much of todays debate.
House Bill 540, sponsored by Phil King (R-Weatherford), would require any referendum or ballot initiative in one of Texas home-rule charter cities to be reviewed by the attorney generals office. The attorney general would rule on whether the proposed ballot initiative or referendum would violate the Texas or federal constitution, a state statute, or a rule adopted as authorized by state statute, or if it would constitute a government taking of private property.
That may sound clear-cut, but its not. The normal method for deciding whether a law is constitutional involves months or years of careful scrutiny by the courts. Instead, King would give that power to bureaucrats in the AGs office. If an initiative is detrimental to a powerful and GOP-allied interest group, would the AGs office really let it slide?
House Bill 540, sponsored by Phil King (R-Weatherford), would require any referendum or ballot initiative in one of Texas home-rule charter cities to be reviewed by the attorney generals office. The attorney general would rule on whether the proposed ballot initiative or referendum would violate the Texas or federal constitution, a state statute, or a rule adopted as authorized by state statute, or if it would constitute a government taking of private property.
That may sound clear-cut, but its not. The normal method for deciding whether a law is constitutional involves months or years of careful scrutiny by the courts. Instead, King would give that power to bureaucrats in the AGs office. If an initiative is detrimental to a powerful and GOP-allied interest group, would the AGs office really let it slide?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 875 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Committee Hears Bill to Allow Ken Paxton to Toss Local Ballot Initiatives (Original Post)
ashling
Mar 2015
OP
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)1. Interesting that Phil King puts us in the same classification
as Korea (ROK). I'd venture to say South Korea is more democratic.
djean111
(14,255 posts)2. The money shot -
But it was fracking bans that motivated him to bring the bill. There are almost 14,000 gas wells in municipal areas, King said, and if what happened in Denton set off a wave of similar ordinances (it hasnt, yet) all those wells, and the money they generate for their owners, would be under threat.
Heh, with the TPP and TTIP, those silly local initiatives, if passed, would just be deemed as interfering with profits, and brought before a corporate court, and tossed. Talk about Democracy........while we still can.