We have a thread about Canada...ugh. <iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IqhMRgNBtvc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Here's a handy website I found where they have subject matter based video clips that show candidates' talking about their position side-by-side: http://www.houstoniamag.com/tags/candidate-convo. Unlike a debate, you can get a feel for the field in 3 minutes per subject instead of 1.5 hours.
Adrian Garcia might make the runoff. Turner will most likely get the most votes and make the runoff while the second spot will be up the big fight. Polling in a low turnout race like this is pretty rough though.
The 'bathroom ordinance' vote might actually increase turnout for the mayoral election. I think King probably benefits the most from opponents to Prop 1, but I don't really see a clear beneficiary for the pro-Prop 1 voters.
I looked at my sample ballot and discovered there are some other props I didn't know about. State Constitution Amendments: 1. “The constitutional amendment increasing the amount of the residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation for public school purposes from $15,000 to $25,000, providing for a reduction of the limitation on the total amount of ad valorem taxes that may be imposed for the those purposes on the homestead of an elderly or disabled person to reflect the increased exemption amount, authorizing the legislature to prohibit a political subdivision that has adopted an optional residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation from reducing the amount of or repealing the exemption and prohibiting the enactment of a law that imposes a transfer tax on a transaction that conveys fee simple title to real property.” 2. “The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of a 100 percent or totally disabled veteran who died before the law authorizing a residence homestead exemption for such a veteran took effect.” 3. “The constitutional amendment repealing the requirement that state officers elected by voters statewide reside in the state capital.” 4. “The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit professional sports team charitable foundation to conduct charitable raffles.” 5. “The constitutional amendment to authorize counties with a population of 7,500 or less to perform private road construction and maintenance.” 6. “The constitutional amendment recognizing the right of the people to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife subject to laws that promote wildlife conservation.” 7. “The constitutional amendment dedicating certain sales and use tax revenue and motor vehicle sales, use and rental tax revenue to the state highway fund to provide funding for non-tolled roads and the reduction of certain transportation-related debt.” Plus, some Harris County propositions: 1. THE ISSUANCE OF $700,000,000.00 HARRIS COUNTY ROAD IMPROVEMENT BONDS, OF WHICH $60,000,000.00 SHALL BE FOR SUBDIVISION STREET REPLACEMENT AND REPAIR, AND THE LEVYING OF THE TAX IN PAYMENT THEREOF. 2. THE ISSUANCE OF $60,000,000.00 HARRIS COUNTY PARKS BONDS AND THE LEVYING OF THE TAX IN PAYMENT THEREOF. 3. THE ISSUANCE OF $24,000,000.00 HARRIS COUNTY VETERINARY PUBLIC HEALTH ADOPTION AND CARE CENTER BONDS AND THE LEVYING OF THE TAX IN PAYMENT THEREOF. 4. THE ISSUANCE OF $64,000,000.00 HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT BONDS AND THE LEVYING OF THE TAX OF THE DISTRICT IN PAYMENT THEREOF.
This one sucks. 3. “The constitutional amendment repealing the requirement that state officers elected by voters statewide reside in the state capital.” It's a backdoor way for Ken Paxton to avoid prosecution in Austin. He'll be able to claim residence in any county that he wants and get a friendlier jury. What a joke...
The fact that a man can go into the ladies restroom is the only thing i have a problem with as for prop 1 if that wasn't in it i think a lot of people would be ok with it.
State Prop 1 will surely pass. Current and prospective homeowners are not going to pass up a tax break and homeowners have been penalized for years. Especially the elderly/retired homeowners.
I'm not sure I agree. I like the idea of, you know, representatives living in the areas they represent. And yes, Ken Paxton is a crapweasel, but he's being prosecuted outside of Austin, right? ***Here's more info and background on the ballot measures than you probably want: http://ballotpedia.org/Texas_2015_ballot_measures *** If you want to be told what other people think, wait a week or so and let the op-ed newspaper boards give their recommendations. My preliminary thoughts: 1: This is the one I really haven't thought through yet, it and #7 are easily the most important. I have no idea how it will actually affect education funding. 2: Clarifying an amendment that passed 5 years ago. Yes. 3: Repealing the provision adopted in 1876, when it was slightly more difficult to travel around the state. Makes sense to me. 4: It's kind of stupid that this is even on the ballot. Vote yes. 5: Changes a law already on the books, simply increases the population threshold. Beneficial with no possible cost to the state. 6: Totally unnecessary, attempting to fix a problem that does not exist. Irrelevant. 7: Possibly the most important one, given our terribly underfunded transportation infrastructure. Not ideal, but probably the best we can do.
Just to clarify, this only applies to people elected statewide. So House Reps and Senators wouldn't be included. I'd be curious to see the rationale of it on either side. It could just be to allow them to live in Round Rock or Westlake, if the current requirement is that they live in Austin-proper.
Ah, gotcha. Then I'm really not sure what the purpose of this is. Saw that the Gov, Lt Gov, Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeals would all be unaffected by this, and still would be required to reside in Austin. There seems to be support and opposition from both parties.
You have to wonder what the motivations are for some of these. For State Constitution Amendments, my default answer is No because I don't trust the process to populate the ballot in the first place. But, after a little reading and thinking, here's my current leaning. State: 1. Increasing Homestead Exemption: No. Texas keeps underfunding schools and I want it going the opposite direction. They say they'll fund some other way, but if they do, they probably give themselves more latitude for more cuts later. Essentially, I don't trust them. 2. Disabled veteran thing: Yes. 3. Residence in Austin: Undecided (remember, default is no). Sounds sensible, but can't help but think there's some insidious backstory here. Will do more reading. 4. Sports raffles: No. Why carve out special rules for professional sports teams? No special interests. 5. Small county roads: Leaning yes. I need to read about what's up with this law. It's probably fine, but I'm a bit suspicious. 6. Right to hunt: No. One part vindictive anti-gun-nut vote, and one part concern that it will limit future legislative latitude to regulate hunting (not that Texas will ever be inclined to anyway). Besides, we don't need a 'right' to hunt. 7. State revenue dedicated to Highway Fund: No. Highways need to be and will be paid for regardless. But, this law would reduce our budgetary flexibility to pay for all the non-road stuff. I'd probably do it for education because I know the government is willing to short-change education to the detriment of everybody. But, I don't think roads are as vulnerable. County: 1-4. All the bonds: Yes. I don't think bond issuances should even be subject to voting if they've already decided they intend to do this stuff. I'm not as keen on the veterinary bond, but I'll vote for it anyway. Hero: Yes, I'm voting for it. Just to annoy Bobby. :grin: Mayor: Not King and not Hall. Leaning toward Chris Bell and considering Costello. Turner would be alright, but I don't think I'll vote for him. Garcia was submarined by his sleazy mustache. Down ballot: No idea.
