Texas proposition's

[jruss]

Started my research last night on my ballot. What are yalls thoughts on the proposition's this time around?

[Ætheling]

No on the tax prop, yes on the others. Not giving the government any more latitude on their ability to tax me. They will never lower taxes or stream line them, they will only increase them. No vote from me.

[jruss]

Wow really? You think the feds should pull federal funding from Texas if abbot doesn't comply to them? You do know that fed money is ours too right? I was leaning towards no on 2 and yes on the others. Guess I got to do more research.

[Ætheling]

Im sorry which proposition allows for the feds to pull federal funding?

[jruss]

Prop two reads.
Texas cities and counties should be required to comply with federal immigration laws or be penalized by loss of state funds.

[Shane]

Prop two reads.
Texas cities and counties should be required to comply with federal immigration laws or be penalized by loss of state funds.

The intent of that is to prevent sanctuary cities (like Austin) where the law enforcement entities decide they won't enforce immigration laws. If a city/county wants to ignore immigration laws, then the state will refuse to give the city/county state funding.

[Mike Javi Cooper]

Proposition 1: NO

Texas should replace the property tax system with an alternative other than an income tax and require voter approval to increase the overall tax burden.

Proposition 2: YES

Texas cities and counties should be required to comply with federal immigration laws or be penalized by loss of state funds.

Proposition 3: YES

Texas should prohibit governmental entities from collecting dues for labor unions through deductions from public employee paychecks.

Proposition 4: YES

Texas and its citizens should strongly assert 10th Amendment Rights guaranteed by the US Constitution which states “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”.

[jruss]

Maybe I'm interpreting wrong? But when I read Federal and comply in the same sentence no is the first thing that pops up:-)

[Ætheling]

Prop two reads.
Texas cities and counties should be required to comply with federal immigration laws or be penalized by loss of state funds.

Oh, no see when they state funds they do not mean federal, they mean state funds out of Austin will be withheld from those cities, the fed has nothing to do with it.

[Shane]

I'm a no on Prop 1 and a yes to the rest. Same reasoning as J Sweet.

I'm flexible on Prop 1, but not until somebody could show me a plan that would show that a sales tax would definitely be better than a property tax AND there would be real mechanisms in place to prevent the sales tax from being raised.

[Ætheling]

Proposition 1: NO

Texas should replace the property tax system with an alternative other than an income tax and require voter approval to increase the overall tax burden.

Proposition 2: YES

Texas cities and counties should be required to comply with federal immigration laws or be penalized by loss of state funds.

Proposition 3: YES

Texas should prohibit governmental entities from collecting dues for labor unions through deductions from public employee paychecks.

Proposition 4: YES

Texas and its citizens should strongly assert 10th Amendment Rights guaranteed by the US Constitution which states “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”.

[Let's go Brandon!]

Proposition 2: YES

Texas cities and counties should be required to comply with federal immigration laws or be penalized by loss of state funds.


Proposition 4: YES

Texas and its citizens should strongly assert 10th Amendment Rights guaranteed by the US Constitution which states “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”.

sounds like a confilct

[jruss]

The intent of that is to prevent sanctuary cities (like Austin) where the law enforcement entities decide they won't enforce immigration laws. If a city/county wants to ignore immigration laws, then the state will refuse to give the city/county state funding.

You sir are way smarter then me. But what if amnesty becomes law? Then would we be forced to comply or lose funding?

[Let's go Brandon!]

The intent of that is to prevent sanctuary cities (like Austin) where the law enforcement entities decide they won't enforce immigration laws. If a city/county wants to ignore immigration laws, then the state will refuse to give the city/county state funding.

ah... I see

[Shane]

You sir are way smarter then me. But what if amnesty becomes law? Then would we be forced to comply or lose funding?

We'd change Texas state law so we could continue to be on the right side of it, I imagine.

Actually, we wouldn't be able to then. All those new citizens would out vote us, and it wouldn't matter either way.