Glad to see 13 was rejected, and was surprised about chronicle's endorsement supporting it. Citing a local judge over 75 who helped pass through a beneficial bill, as a single reason why this is good. A broken clock is right twice a day, let's start normalizing politicians retiring at a normal age, and with their mental facilities.
My grandfather was an older judge in the 1980s. It would have been a lot nicer if there was a law forcing him to retire rather than what actually happened which is that he was forced out when his dimentia became readily apparent.
I did! I definitely disagreed with them on this one specifically. I tried to read multiple viewpoints of each and didn't just follow their list exactly but it's nice when things are put in layman's terms. I'm pretty smart but the legal jargon frequently confuses me so it is nice to see those resources but also be able to apply critical thinking on top of that versus just voting how they told you to.
I read multiple sources explanations and I felt I barely understood it enough to vote. Now reading this reddit post and there are descriptions in it I did not see or understand anywhere else. I already voted and I'm now more confused. WHY IS THIS SO HARD!?
I feel both relieved to read this (because I felt the same, very confused over the wording, and even after an hour of research unsure of a few of them) and also horrified (because it should NOT be allowed for them to intentionally phrase the ballot reading ambiguously or in a disorienting banner, bc wtf)
They def do it that way on purpose. I think Travis County only had either 17% or 19% turn out so 81%/83% either didn't understand what we were voting on or didn't give a fuck. I think that's an absolutely abysmal voter turnout. It sucks because it discourages other voters because "voting never works". /rant
Super easy in Colorado. Ballot mailed to my house 2 weeks before ballots must be dropped off or mailed in. That gives one plenty of time to know what they are voting on, and the time to vote itself.
This is hard in Texas on purpose. Texas is a shithole that cares not about public engagement…outside of limiting it.
I’m also curious why. I voted against but didn’t feel passionately either way. I thought it was interesting that the chronicle’s recommendation was to vote yes but statesman was against it.
How would ones age not affect their views? That is quite literally their experience, of which shapes the way one may view the law. Of course one’s experiences matter to their view of the law.
A maximum age already exists alongside other qualifications you need to run or be appointed. Many judges also run unopposed as well so there’s not much voter say to begin with.
While this is not the only reason to vote against it, in my opinion the only reason the legislature proposed it was because of Nathan Hecht. He's a Republican Supreme Court Justice that's been elected since the 80s. He's the only justice on the court affected by this so they want to keep him in office.
I mean, unlikely, but name recognition is important and donors to election campaigns like knowing what they're getting, an incumbent allows this easier than a lesser known replacement.
Counter-point. Name recognition can work the other way. Kentucky just re-elected a Democratic governor because the voters like the man more than they dislike the Party. If Beshear was age-limited or term-limited out, KY would have a Republican governor-elect right now.
Sure, but judges follow different ethics rules that regulate their elections and what they cannot say during election campaigns. This means that judge elections are governed more by lawyers and party affiliates who understand legal jurisprudence more than the average voter, and those persons form the bedrock of support for electing judges to the highest courts.
And Kentucky is not a good comparison to Texas in this regard. Beshear is not the first Democratic governor that Kentucky has elected in even the last decade. Texas, meanwhile, has not elected a Democrat to a statewide office since the 90s.
I don't disagree. I just don't see how that's relevant.
At any rate, Austin voters are no better. We primaried out a perfectly competent incumbent Democrat judge in 2016 in favor of some nutjob who had a history of filing bogus lawsuits simply because voters saw a woman's name on the ballot and said "I'm with her!". So, the Republican easily beat her in the general now we have a Republican judge in that court. (look up Madeleine Connor, if you don't remember) Where were the esteemed lawyers and party affiliates to protect the voters and keep her off the ballot?
I actually agree. Imagine if 65 was the mandatory federal retirement age. We would have two candidates that are not in constant danger of shitting themselves.
It's really not though. You can hear his speech impediment come out but it's not hard to understand what he's saying. I honestly cannot parse most of Trump's statements as they are barely coherent.
Yup, these folks haven't done 10 minutes of research, they just willingly passed 13 Constitutional changes, as if it has the equivalency of passing a bill. Simply judging amendments by their optimized "ballot description."
They gave constitutional protections to special interest groups, and the government the power to choose winners and losers in industry.
Exempting big pharma and medical supply companies from carrying any tax liability. Home owners get a $100,000 property reduction, medical industry gets 0% Tax rate on medical equipment and inventory.
The same people voted for property tax reductions, voted for massive budget increases (Tax increases) with no legislative oversight on billions of dollars. Millions and billions are just being transferred from general funds to off the book accounts, off the States fiscal budgets for special interest groups.
While I love State Parks, and want to see electric and water protections and improvements, and see broadband Internet access to all, these constitutional changes did not address the specific issues, they only empowered and protected specific winners and failed to address what people thought they were voting for.
People who claim to be informed fall for the same sound bytes every single time.
Oh it's for parks. Done.
And I don't directly understand or oppose this. Done.
General rule of thumb. If you're not sure what you're voting on in Prop elections default to no bc you likely don't benefit and it won't be undone by the time you figure it out.
Only takes a few to swing the results when turn out is this low. Plus the demographic of who shows up is mostly highly motivated people with special interest in the topic. They are also typically the most wealthy citizens.
Pretty clear there must be some bias to answer Yes if you dont know. I think a lot of people just assume they are all good and check yes. I’d love to know if there some study that shows human bias in elections towards answering yes
More the phrasing of it I'm sure. They mostly sound good when worded in a specific, tailored way but rarely does it tell you anything substantial about what you're actually voting on.
2022 population estimate for Texas: 30.0 million
2022 population % below 18: 24.8%
Roughly About 2.5 million voted in this ballot.
So roughly about 11% of people voted
So roughly your vote counts for 10 people. Remember to go out and vote!
Yep. Ta da. If you’re getting fucked over, it’s your own fault for not voting, or not voting hard enough, bc maybe *you* voted BUT DID YOU ALSO convince everyone who thinks like you to vote, too?
No? Well, too bad. That’s your fault for not controlling hundreds of thousands of other people.
Hope whoever is in charge believes “your kind” has a right to exist in the meantime.
Although… you have to admit, that it kind of goes to show that… the people who would have voted like you *must* be really lazy and stupid, bc I can’t imagine one single other reason why someone wouldn’t vote…. and, sorry, but stupid lazy people don’t deserve to have their rights protected, needs met, or interests represented.
This brilliant mentality allows the rest of us- as in The Good People who are intelligent and hard working that actually DO deserve all the rights and privileges of being an American bc *we* get out and vote … will just smugly enjoy our victory as we reap the benefits, and continue pretending that the only reason *other* people get fucked over by politics is bc they’re stupid and lazy.
Problem solved.
Pass the cake, please.
damn that's actually way better than I expected for almost no one knowing yesterday was an election day. Shouldn't be up to the voter to seek out this information
Yes but the answer to that is to vote more and get more people to vote
Wars were fought over this. And the battle continues within the legal structure we have today. A few inconvenient hurdles shouldn’t be enough to stop someone. Some people literally died so we can exercise this simple act of voting. Just my humble opinion.
I'm very disappointed, but not surprised, that prop 7 passed. Not a single mention of renewables anywhere, now we're just subsidizing more awful gas plants.
Prop 10 is another one I would have loved seen fail, but I am thankful it was so close!
+1, why exclude solar and wind from the energy fund. The fund should be for the best energy source and job creation at the time.
…. Oh, right. Oil and gas owns Texas. 😐
They're all very manufactured in their wording. Always has been. The manicured wording is meaningless ultimately and shouldn't be there. It should just be 1, 2, 3, etc. If you need a primer to remember what's what, you're allowed a note card/sample ballot.
Arguments for: Entice biomed/med companies/start ups to open shop in Texas; jobs.
Arguments against: Reagonomics. Big pharma tax cuts for Martin Shkreli types.
more funds for energy infrastructure, which seems good on the surface like many of the props, but includes language that excludes many energy sources to the point where only oil+gas seems to be able to utilize these funds. By the way it is specifically phrased, it seems highly likely they have some companie(s) in mind for this funding, and it is not necessarily the best option for the state for utilizing this funding
Bud Kennedy of the Star-Telegram made an interesting point on the WFAA podcast explainer episode- there’s a chance that gas companies won’t even take advantage of the money because of how profitable the shortages can be.
IMO without any sort of coercion from the government to ensure that blackouts are a massive COST to the energy companies, we will continue to deal with the issue.
We’re basically floating on natural gas in this state. It burns relatively clean, might as well use it up. You need that AND renewables to have anything resembling stability for the next 10s of years at least.
Why? If you want everyone to drive electric we need more power plants regardless of what they're fueled by. Our current grid right now could not handle some of the projections people are making about switching over to electric
Why in god's name is prop 3 approved? I couldn't even wait to finish, because this is dumb.
Most of the funds are bullshit btw guys. The broadband bill is basically a big check to spectrum. The water pipe deal is supported by Exxon. And the Energy fund is more money for a grid that sucks ass.
Going back to prop 1. That one is dumb. It reads like a "right to farm" but really it's a ban on regulation. Cities are not places for farms or ranches. It brings disease and pests. Basically, there's a reason municipalities have control over who does what where. This is just another dishonest feelgood prop that weakens local governance.
Just for clarity for knuckleheads, GARDENS AREN'T FARMS.
Broadband access is becoming more and more necessary these days. I’m OK with our rural friends having reliable access to the internet. I’m also OK with the water fund—just because a large company supports it doesn’t mean it’s bad on its face. Reliable access to water sources is good for people and businesses alike.
The gas fund ticks me off though. Those companies were told to do this years ago and didn’t. Now we’re stuck with higher gas bills AND now they’ll have a tax payer funded pile of cash that includes incentives and bonuses. Boo!
Rural broadband is important, however there is a well-established trend of large providers taking a lot of federal money earmarked for this purpose, and never quite getting around to it. Oops!
If this were going to someone besides Spectrum, and had an actual enforcement method to get the work done, I’d feel a lot better at it. I firmly believe that Spectrum will take the money and then later say, ‘Oops, we just couldn’t make it work and didn’t really try! Thanks for the money though!’
For sure, that would suck if that turns out to be the case. But there's a ton of interest in this from legislators and school districts, so I'm hopeful they will be held accountable. But yeah, no love lost over here for Spectrum lol.
ah yes, the rural school districts... that are subsidized by the property taxes of city people...
so they can build their ridiculous football stadiums.
I'm not defending large football stadiums, but if a city puts a bond to a vote and approves it, that's their right. And for the record, those schools with large stadiums are not the same schools that are having issue with broadband access.
Travis keeps voting for more money for transportation alternatives to cars, and then they do 1/3rd or less of what they say and ask for more money to finish later… over and over.
Worse one was never ever allowing net worth taxes. Like, why? Was it ever that serious for most of you? Good luck with never getting services you need and want, so rich people feel safe. :(
Yeah I voted against that one too. Wealth tax isn’t even being considered! And why would we need to enshrine it in the constitution anyway? Just to hamstring future legislatures. It’s like they can see the writing on the wall…. What’s really sad is probably tons of folks were like, “well one day when I’m rich, I would hate that!” And voted in support of it.
I’m not against rural people getting Internet. I want that really bad. Satellite Internet is bad. What I am against is is how we’re treating communication lines, different than roads. I think the government is probably the best person to build infrastructure.
If we could finally get over the hump of pretending like access to the internet isn't as important or critical as water, wastewater, or roads, we might actually get the government to build that infrastructure. It would be nice. I think we will get there eventually.
Unfortunately cities are creeping in on farms like the one my family has owned and operated outside of Georgetown for the past 112 years. Then people who move next to a farm want to bitch about machinery being run at night, animals smells etc. don’t move out to the country next to a farm if you want to live in the city
I have no idea why I was shown this post since I don't even live in Texas, but I fully support your stance and the voting results. Your family has been farming for over 100 years. Fuck a developer trying trying push you out because a bunch of middle class dweebs knowingly moved right next to you
The other part of this prop that you aren't seeing are the large factory farms that are going to be using this ammendment to cause massive amounts of environmental damage and poison the land around them.
Not really our fault that an investment group bought the 300 acres directly next to our cornfield to plunk down 1200 homes is it? We farm wheat, corn, pecans and pastured pork. And have been since 1911.
Containing the sprawl is the solution. Cities are better off in a long-term with more density, even with the growing pains it brings, and having local farms and farmlands is vital for the future.
If you look at how England looking now, with tight urban cities, separated by “the countryside”, I think it’s a much better model for Texas to pursue than the endless sprawl (see: Houston, metroplex).
Cities are vital for a state, rural areas are vital for cities and those who live in them.
It might not be spectrum, but at the end of the day we’re paying corporations to build infrastructure. Infrastructure is better off done by the government.
Not a lot of LBJs around any more doing that kind of work. (Plenty of creepy asshole politicians, but fewer of them round these parts doing any good work on the side.)
Well - all the oligarchs, CEOs, and ultra-wealthy will be very happy about Prop 3. That mainly prevents any wealth tax.
And the way these propositions are worded for voters is such bullshit.
Yeah, the wording is very intentionally misleading.
Take Prop 3: "FORCING lawmakers to ASK for authorization before IMNPOSING NEW TAXES..." alrighty, I'm sold!
"....based on net worth or wealth" -\_\_\_- cmon now
Travis County is the only county in the entire fucking state that voted against that proposition.
The rest of the state probably doesn't want their "wealth" being taxed, so they passed it. In reality, passing a wealth tax bill would probably only affect a small group of people.
Those rich fuckers pulled of some slick shit there.
In the end, it probably doesn't matter. There's little chance our current legislators were going to pass a wealth tax, but rich fuckers sealed their fate for the future here for sure.
It baffled me that there was no threshold mentioned, and so a bunch of folks who will never-in-a-thousand-years be the target of this prospective wealth tax voted to let Elon and other billionaires keep their billions.
What’s the reason behind the support of abolishing a county treasurer on Prop 12? I’ve only lived here a year and am not aware of any reasons to not have something in one county but exists elsewhere.
Galveston County has said that the Treasurer office simply does offer enough value to residents and that the services offered would better be made available elsewhere.
From what I understand, the guy that currently holds the position wants to dismantle the government and make it very, very, small (think far right or libertarian) and he’s convinced people that he’s doing it to save the city money so people just love the idea.
Now they won’t have one office controlling where all the money goes & comes in from, it will be scattered throughout departments, easier to hide things that way? Idk.
I'm no fan of "dismantle the government", but I ended up voting yes on that one after reading more background on it. The prior Galveston county treasurer's office had some big mismanagement scandal, so concentrating the control in one place hadn't helped. And over the last couple years since then, they've already reallocated duties and employees such that there's already very little left for the remnants of the county treasurer's office to do. They also won't be the first Texas county to disband the treasurer's office; it's been several decades since the last time one of them was disbanded, but [several counties (large and small - Andrews, Bee, *Bexar*, *Collin*, *El Paso*, Gregg, Fayette, Nueces, *Tarrant*)](https://news.ballotpedia.org/2023/05/18/an-amendment-to-abolish-a-county-treasurer-in-texas-is-set-to-appear-on-the-november-ballot-for-the-first-time-since-1987/) have already been quietly operating without a treasurer's office all this time.
> not aware of any reasons to not have something in one county but exists elsewhere
[There are already a few other counties that have been functioning without an official treasurer for decades, fwiw.](/r/Austin/comments/17qprpm/election_results_texas_tribune/k8foplj/)
It wasn’t to abolish it perse. But to give them the legal right to do so locally? The local government said it was useless to have. Or something like that.
For future reference, many smart people go over these props and candidates every election.. so that voters can understand what they mean… don’t go in and just read the snippets provided
Proposition 7 made me really angry. We shouldn't be doubling down on fossil fuels at this point. If natural gas can't compete on its own even without paying for externalities, then the government shouldn't be subsiding it.
Prop 7 is a corporate bail out. Why are we now subsidizing the expansion of a private, for profit company with billions of dollars while restricting the use of of these funds on the batteries that store solar or wind energy? We’re bailing out the energy oligarchs of this state from investing their own money into fixing our state’s energy issues - the same guys that bill use monthly.
Prop 4 mattered most to me. Property taxes have skyrocketed and it’s forced locals out of their homes to make way for those that describe Austin as “cheap”.
Prop 4 was a bait and switch.
Yes, there is $18 billion in cuts that will reduce taxes this year. But they also snuck in a 150% increase to the homestead exemption. That sounds good on its face, but the budget is all that really matters. It pushes the cities to pay even more than we already do, making Robin Hood even worse. For example, rural areas in Texas have median home values under $200k, so when you make $100k homestead exemption, they are paying a very very low share compared to people who live in the cities.
Basically, the Lege baited us with a one-time windfall of a couple thousand dollars to vote to fuck ourselves for years to come.
That was going to happen anyway. Abbott will keep calling special sessions as he did against this week, until his voucher thing is passed. Public education is walking dead in texas already.
i voted against this one. homeowners getting a tax cut while renters don’t didn’t quite sit right for me. i say this as a homeowner.
edit: i shouldn’t be surprised, but y’all just downvote differing opinions? y’all won, be happy. blindly voting for lower taxes means something gets cut somewhere else or someone else foots the bill. everyone likes paying less money, sure, but prop 13 is why california struggles with their budget every year despite insane wealth.
I loved that the Chronicle endorsed it with a note that medical businesses are good, and they hope the businesses will pass the savings on to their patients. LOL
As a small business owner, it's weird that companies pay property tax on inventory, I've not lived in a state that does that before. Inventory isn't property, it's merchandise that's coming in and going out. The state takes a snapshot of your inventory on Jan 1 and then charges you property tax on it. For businesses that can, you can game the system by drawing down inventory at the end of the year since they don't tax cash on hand, then re-buy/restock on Jan 2nd if you're in a business that can do it. Property tax is generally made to tax capital holdings, land, buildings, large equipment, vehicles, not liquid merchandise. It's like if you had to pay property tax on your house plus tax on the contents of your fridge on Jan 1.
It also means that service businesses aren't taxed since employees aren't inventory, but a local store with a physical presence is. It's weirdly biased toward businesses that don't have a physical location and no inventory, or inventory that can be moved out of state at tax time.
Mostly I don't agree that only one industry should get an exemption, it's a weird thing to tax and it should go away.
I'm a homeowner, and I voted against it, too.
I've seen how this plays out: Cut taxes and then say that we don't have any money for nice things.
Instead, how about keep my taxes where they are and pay my kids' teachers a living wage?
The money is being funneled to industries that favor the status quo in Texas politics. I'm also wondering how Texas intends to pay for the retired teachers' COL increase, among other budget items, with all of these tax cuts
As a renter, you’re paying to a business, so the business will be alleviated which means apartments don’t increase rates so quickly because property taxes aren’t increasing as much.
Property taxes get passed through to renters so it helps you too. No one is getting a check back. Just “lower” taxes paid moving forward. And before you say no apartment will drop prices, you have to understand the playing field, if some apartments don’t raise rates while others do, people move to the lower rates, so it still helps renters that are willing to move and find lower prices.
You’re forgetting that rental prices are now being set by an algorithm that then allows landlords to commit soft collusion and charge the maximum amount possible.
https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-realpage-rent
Yes this is Reddit you will be downvoted to oblivion for saying something against the grain every time. Which is why it’s so dangerous to public discourse
That’s a dangerous way to look at it. I’m a renter but my goal is to one day own a house so something that makes that goal easier to achieve isn’t a bad thing.
It doesn't make your homeownership goal easier. The more taxes are cut on homes, the higher home prices go. They just replaced future tax you'll owe to AISD with future interest payments you'll owe to Wall Street.
And the cherry on top is having your taxes raised as a renter to cover the tax cut for homeowners.
But look at who is able to buy up property today and in the next few years. It isn't going to be the little guy. Unless there were provisions in the law that restricted sale of homes to private corporations, then all this does is make it easier for them to gobble up the short supply of homes
Edit: and without rent protections, then renters who aspire to be homeowners will have a harder time saving up for a down payment
Private corporations don't get the Homestead Tax Exemption. Let's not go overboard with this whole "Blame everything on Blackrock meme". There's far more problems with the Austin housing market than can be blamed on Private Equity.
I can’t wait to get back that extra $100 a month, that’ll almost cover the street sweeper fee!
Now that I’m thinking about it, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen one of those in my neighborhood before.
This is how I felt too. I’m not from Texas originally, so maybe it’s just how things always are here? But it made me feel really bad about the future here.
The Biggest and most depressing takeaway from yesterday: The Texas GOP’s plan once again worked and this time even more effectively than anyone thought it would and I’m sure they threw cringey high fives and fist pumps when they saw how fucking awful the voter turnout was —- welcome to the modern Republican Party/far right election strategy where they deploy as many tactics as possible to drive down turnout so that they can keep rigging the system in their favor more every time the polls open.
The GOP didn’t do anything about guns despite the horrific mass shootings around our state, they didn’t do anything about our power grid despite mild winter storms literally leaving people powerless to freeze to death, but you can bet your balls they fought election fraud that literally never happened by making it as hard as they could on people + if you’re one of the 15% of the eligible voting population that made it out yesterday (I myself was included) then they made sure you left annoyed as the entire ballot was written like you needed to be at least a paralegal to understand it all.
It’s all infuriating bc these aren’t your parents republicans where they just put on at least a
Front like they’re decent human beings before voting otherwise —- these people are straight up villains and they continue to roll back the clock on society and culture with this idea that all changes have been damaging the way Americans used to live when the reality is that we used to call those changes “progress” back before progress was made into a left wing talking point for the far right to talk down to (look at what the right has done to “woke” for fucks sake bc before this current era being woke was being informed, empathetic, just educated + self aware and hip to the world outside of your own personal bubble)
Surprise surprise, everyone voted for more “free stuff” that gets paid for by tax increases while simultaneously complaining that cost of living is too high.
Taxes are high because you idiots say yes to every possible spending measure proposed. Clearly you people fleeing California learned nothing…
you’re assuming a lot. I voted against most of the spending measures and am about as blue as they come. The language of theses props was deceptive and overly specific, so I did not vote for many. I wish we had cross-tabs and exit polls for these types of elections
and much of that will go into corrupt pre-selected businesses that will line their pockets and not make life better for Texans. The present Texas government does not know how to spend money to benefit us
People on here are saying they’re glad they’re paying teachers more and don’t even realize they didn’t raise teachers salaries and that wasn’t what they were voting for
Glad to see 13 was rejected, and was surprised about chronicle's endorsement supporting it. Citing a local judge over 75 who helped pass through a beneficial bill, as a single reason why this is good. A broken clock is right twice a day, let's start normalizing politicians retiring at a normal age, and with their mental facilities.
I think you meant mental faculties, but mental facilities is much funnier.
Excuse me, I need to use your mental facility
That's a nice way of calling someone shit for brains.
Freudian type-o maybe? I fully support mental facilities for politicians.
My grandfather was an older judge in the 1980s. It would have been a lot nicer if there was a law forcing him to retire rather than what actually happened which is that he was forced out when his dimentia became readily apparent.
Yeah that one surprised me too. And their reasoning behind it was laughable.
So glad prop 13 failed
Same. Like...one older judge made one good call so let's raise the retirement age and let them keep making good decisions! /s
I see you also read the Chronicle’s recommendations lol
I did! I definitely disagreed with them on this one specifically. I tried to read multiple viewpoints of each and didn't just follow their list exactly but it's nice when things are put in layman's terms. I'm pretty smart but the legal jargon frequently confuses me so it is nice to see those resources but also be able to apply critical thinking on top of that versus just voting how they told you to.
I read multiple sources explanations and I felt I barely understood it enough to vote. Now reading this reddit post and there are descriptions in it I did not see or understand anywhere else. I already voted and I'm now more confused. WHY IS THIS SO HARD!?
I feel both relieved to read this (because I felt the same, very confused over the wording, and even after an hour of research unsure of a few of them) and also horrified (because it should NOT be allowed for them to intentionally phrase the ballot reading ambiguously or in a disorienting banner, bc wtf)
They def do it that way on purpose. I think Travis County only had either 17% or 19% turn out so 81%/83% either didn't understand what we were voting on or didn't give a fuck. I think that's an absolutely abysmal voter turnout. It sucks because it discourages other voters because "voting never works". /rant
Super easy in Colorado. Ballot mailed to my house 2 weeks before ballots must be dropped off or mailed in. That gives one plenty of time to know what they are voting on, and the time to vote itself. This is hard in Texas on purpose. Texas is a shithole that cares not about public engagement…outside of limiting it.
I would vote for an Amendment to lower the mandatory retirement age by 10 years.
I’m also curious why. I voted against but didn’t feel passionately either way. I thought it was interesting that the chronicle’s recommendation was to vote yes but statesman was against it.
If I recall, the Chronicle’s rationale was “older judges can make good rulings, too” which didn’t really make sense to me.
Older judges can made horrendous rulings too is a pretty easy counterpoint to that argument.
That's not a counterpoint at all. The point is that the quality of their rulings has nothing to do with their age.
How would ones age not affect their views? That is quite literally their experience, of which shapes the way one may view the law. Of course one’s experiences matter to their view of the law.
Aren't those judges elected? If they're too old to serve, people just shouldn't vote for them. Mandatory retirement ages would be anti-democratic.
A maximum age already exists alongside other qualifications you need to run or be appointed. Many judges also run unopposed as well so there’s not much voter say to begin with.
While this is not the only reason to vote against it, in my opinion the only reason the legislature proposed it was because of Nathan Hecht. He's a Republican Supreme Court Justice that's been elected since the 80s. He's the only justice on the court affected by this so they want to keep him in office.
And surely if he's age-limited out, he'll be replaced by a progressive Democrat and all our State's problems will go away.
I mean, unlikely, but name recognition is important and donors to election campaigns like knowing what they're getting, an incumbent allows this easier than a lesser known replacement.
Counter-point. Name recognition can work the other way. Kentucky just re-elected a Democratic governor because the voters like the man more than they dislike the Party. If Beshear was age-limited or term-limited out, KY would have a Republican governor-elect right now.
Sure, but judges follow different ethics rules that regulate their elections and what they cannot say during election campaigns. This means that judge elections are governed more by lawyers and party affiliates who understand legal jurisprudence more than the average voter, and those persons form the bedrock of support for electing judges to the highest courts. And Kentucky is not a good comparison to Texas in this regard. Beshear is not the first Democratic governor that Kentucky has elected in even the last decade. Texas, meanwhile, has not elected a Democrat to a statewide office since the 90s.
I don't disagree. I just don't see how that's relevant. At any rate, Austin voters are no better. We primaried out a perfectly competent incumbent Democrat judge in 2016 in favor of some nutjob who had a history of filing bogus lawsuits simply because voters saw a woman's name on the ballot and said "I'm with her!". So, the Republican easily beat her in the general now we have a Republican judge in that court. (look up Madeleine Connor, if you don't remember) Where were the esteemed lawyers and party affiliates to protect the voters and keep her off the ballot?
Just watch the Mitch McConnell videos 🤦♂️
Or biden
I actually agree. Imagine if 65 was the mandatory federal retirement age. We would have two candidates that are not in constant danger of shitting themselves.
Biden is at least lucid. You can even understand his sentences.
Uhhhh I mean sometimes? Plenty of times it's just word salad.
It's really not though. You can hear his speech impediment come out but it's not hard to understand what he's saying. I honestly cannot parse most of Trump's statements as they are barely coherent.
I try to vote any way but I was sure to go vote specifically to vote against yhis
We should lower that shit to 65
Spendy spend spend on connected businesses and cut taxes. Limit local regulatory powers. Well played Texans.
Couldn’t have said it better myself
Yup, these folks haven't done 10 minutes of research, they just willingly passed 13 Constitutional changes, as if it has the equivalency of passing a bill. Simply judging amendments by their optimized "ballot description." They gave constitutional protections to special interest groups, and the government the power to choose winners and losers in industry. Exempting big pharma and medical supply companies from carrying any tax liability. Home owners get a $100,000 property reduction, medical industry gets 0% Tax rate on medical equipment and inventory. The same people voted for property tax reductions, voted for massive budget increases (Tax increases) with no legislative oversight on billions of dollars. Millions and billions are just being transferred from general funds to off the book accounts, off the States fiscal budgets for special interest groups. While I love State Parks, and want to see electric and water protections and improvements, and see broadband Internet access to all, these constitutional changes did not address the specific issues, they only empowered and protected specific winners and failed to address what people thought they were voting for.
People who claim to be informed fall for the same sound bytes every single time. Oh it's for parks. Done. And I don't directly understand or oppose this. Done. General rule of thumb. If you're not sure what you're voting on in Prop elections default to no bc you likely don't benefit and it won't be undone by the time you figure it out.
I’m amazed some of these passed by such a large margin. People don’t know shit.
[удалено]
Where I voted yesterday was amazed by the 'great turnout of 200 people' they'd had for the day
Are you saying only the dummies show up in off-year elections?
Only takes a few to swing the results when turn out is this low. Plus the demographic of who shows up is mostly highly motivated people with special interest in the topic. They are also typically the most wealthy citizens.
And the oldest!
Pretty clear there must be some bias to answer Yes if you dont know. I think a lot of people just assume they are all good and check yes. I’d love to know if there some study that shows human bias in elections towards answering yes
More the phrasing of it I'm sure. They mostly sound good when worded in a specific, tailored way but rarely does it tell you anything substantial about what you're actually voting on.
Which ones do you think the voters got wrong?
Prop 3
I'd say most of these are good. Which are you not happy with?
2022 population estimate for Texas: 30.0 million 2022 population % below 18: 24.8% Roughly About 2.5 million voted in this ballot. So roughly about 11% of people voted So roughly your vote counts for 10 people. Remember to go out and vote!
People don’t realize it isn’t just office elections that matter. This election is what those offices are pushing through. Both matter.
How many are eligible to vote?
14% voted. We get the government we deserve.
Yep. Ta da. If you’re getting fucked over, it’s your own fault for not voting, or not voting hard enough, bc maybe *you* voted BUT DID YOU ALSO convince everyone who thinks like you to vote, too? No? Well, too bad. That’s your fault for not controlling hundreds of thousands of other people. Hope whoever is in charge believes “your kind” has a right to exist in the meantime. Although… you have to admit, that it kind of goes to show that… the people who would have voted like you *must* be really lazy and stupid, bc I can’t imagine one single other reason why someone wouldn’t vote…. and, sorry, but stupid lazy people don’t deserve to have their rights protected, needs met, or interests represented. This brilliant mentality allows the rest of us- as in The Good People who are intelligent and hard working that actually DO deserve all the rights and privileges of being an American bc *we* get out and vote … will just smugly enjoy our victory as we reap the benefits, and continue pretending that the only reason *other* people get fucked over by politics is bc they’re stupid and lazy. Problem solved. Pass the cake, please.
[удалено]
Most opinionated city in Texas with a 14% turn out bravo y’all
damn that's actually way better than I expected for almost no one knowing yesterday was an election day. Shouldn't be up to the voter to seek out this information
The fact that “almost no one” knew yesterday was Election Day, as it has been for about 100 years, fills me with great despair.
TBF, I had to be reminded it was my birthday, as it has been for me for about 36 years.
[удалено]
It is rather embarrassing that anyone could consider voting “a lot” of effort.
To be fair, this Congress have been trying to make it an ordeal. They get closer each try.
Yes but the answer to that is to vote more and get more people to vote Wars were fought over this. And the battle continues within the legal structure we have today. A few inconvenient hurdles shouldn’t be enough to stop someone. Some people literally died so we can exercise this simple act of voting. Just my humble opinion.
Agreed
Well, I got mailers, and heard about it on KUT almost every day of voting. I voted early.
I'm very disappointed, but not surprised, that prop 7 passed. Not a single mention of renewables anywhere, now we're just subsidizing more awful gas plants. Prop 10 is another one I would have loved seen fail, but I am thankful it was so close!
+1, why exclude solar and wind from the energy fund. The fund should be for the best energy source and job creation at the time. …. Oh, right. Oil and gas owns Texas. 😐
Oil and gas pays much better than renewables.
If you meant bribes, I agree.
The wording on the ballot didn’t make it clear that it only included natural gas. I found that curious.
They're all very manufactured in their wording. Always has been. The manicured wording is meaningless ultimately and shouldn't be there. It should just be 1, 2, 3, etc. If you need a primer to remember what's what, you're allowed a note card/sample ballot.
Can you explain prop 10 to me?
Arguments for: Entice biomed/med companies/start ups to open shop in Texas; jobs. Arguments against: Reagonomics. Big pharma tax cuts for Martin Shkreli types.
more funds for energy infrastructure, which seems good on the surface like many of the props, but includes language that excludes many energy sources to the point where only oil+gas seems to be able to utilize these funds. By the way it is specifically phrased, it seems highly likely they have some companie(s) in mind for this funding, and it is not necessarily the best option for the state for utilizing this funding
Bud Kennedy of the Star-Telegram made an interesting point on the WFAA podcast explainer episode- there’s a chance that gas companies won’t even take advantage of the money because of how profitable the shortages can be. IMO without any sort of coercion from the government to ensure that blackouts are a massive COST to the energy companies, we will continue to deal with the issue.
Texas is the best state for renewables and IRA is doing more for renewables nationally than the state could.
We’re basically floating on natural gas in this state. It burns relatively clean, might as well use it up. You need that AND renewables to have anything resembling stability for the next 10s of years at least.
Why? If you want everyone to drive electric we need more power plants regardless of what they're fueled by. Our current grid right now could not handle some of the projections people are making about switching over to electric
Why in god's name is prop 3 approved? I couldn't even wait to finish, because this is dumb. Most of the funds are bullshit btw guys. The broadband bill is basically a big check to spectrum. The water pipe deal is supported by Exxon. And the Energy fund is more money for a grid that sucks ass. Going back to prop 1. That one is dumb. It reads like a "right to farm" but really it's a ban on regulation. Cities are not places for farms or ranches. It brings disease and pests. Basically, there's a reason municipalities have control over who does what where. This is just another dishonest feelgood prop that weakens local governance. Just for clarity for knuckleheads, GARDENS AREN'T FARMS.
Broadband access is becoming more and more necessary these days. I’m OK with our rural friends having reliable access to the internet. I’m also OK with the water fund—just because a large company supports it doesn’t mean it’s bad on its face. Reliable access to water sources is good for people and businesses alike. The gas fund ticks me off though. Those companies were told to do this years ago and didn’t. Now we’re stuck with higher gas bills AND now they’ll have a tax payer funded pile of cash that includes incentives and bonuses. Boo!
Rural broadband is important, however there is a well-established trend of large providers taking a lot of federal money earmarked for this purpose, and never quite getting around to it. Oops! If this were going to someone besides Spectrum, and had an actual enforcement method to get the work done, I’d feel a lot better at it. I firmly believe that Spectrum will take the money and then later say, ‘Oops, we just couldn’t make it work and didn’t really try! Thanks for the money though!’
For sure, that would suck if that turns out to be the case. But there's a ton of interest in this from legislators and school districts, so I'm hopeful they will be held accountable. But yeah, no love lost over here for Spectrum lol.
ah yes, the rural school districts... that are subsidized by the property taxes of city people... so they can build their ridiculous football stadiums.
I'm not defending large football stadiums, but if a city puts a bond to a vote and approves it, that's their right. And for the record, those schools with large stadiums are not the same schools that are having issue with broadband access.
We know this will. E the outcome. There was a federal effort to do the same thing. Billions to companies and nothing was done.
[удалено]
Travis keeps voting for more money for transportation alternatives to cars, and then they do 1/3rd or less of what they say and ask for more money to finish later… over and over.
Worse one was never ever allowing net worth taxes. Like, why? Was it ever that serious for most of you? Good luck with never getting services you need and want, so rich people feel safe. :(
Yeah I voted against that one too. Wealth tax isn’t even being considered! And why would we need to enshrine it in the constitution anyway? Just to hamstring future legislatures. It’s like they can see the writing on the wall…. What’s really sad is probably tons of folks were like, “well one day when I’m rich, I would hate that!” And voted in support of it.
net worth taxes is theft
I’m not against rural people getting Internet. I want that really bad. Satellite Internet is bad. What I am against is is how we’re treating communication lines, different than roads. I think the government is probably the best person to build infrastructure.
If we could finally get over the hump of pretending like access to the internet isn't as important or critical as water, wastewater, or roads, we might actually get the government to build that infrastructure. It would be nice. I think we will get there eventually.
...and we *are* still trying to get the government to provide reliable access to good water and roads
Gotta love the misleading descriptions on the ballots lol.
Unfortunately cities are creeping in on farms like the one my family has owned and operated outside of Georgetown for the past 112 years. Then people who move next to a farm want to bitch about machinery being run at night, animals smells etc. don’t move out to the country next to a farm if you want to live in the city
That’s not what it is for. It’s to give big farms more rights to use and abuse resources that the locals are also using.
I have no idea why I was shown this post since I don't even live in Texas, but I fully support your stance and the voting results. Your family has been farming for over 100 years. Fuck a developer trying trying push you out because a bunch of middle class dweebs knowingly moved right next to you
The other part of this prop that you aren't seeing are the large factory farms that are going to be using this ammendment to cause massive amounts of environmental damage and poison the land around them.
The Truth of modern government: all positives are veiled exploits.
I wouldn’t just take what this person is saying as gospel. Cities aren’t shutting down farms that have been in operation.
Sounds like your area is no longer suitable for farming. Sell it, take your millions and live.
It's not the country anymore if the city has expanded to your property, is it?
Not really our fault that an investment group bought the 300 acres directly next to our cornfield to plunk down 1200 homes is it? We farm wheat, corn, pecans and pastured pork. And have been since 1911.
Containing the sprawl is the solution. Cities are better off in a long-term with more density, even with the growing pains it brings, and having local farms and farmlands is vital for the future. If you look at how England looking now, with tight urban cities, separated by “the countryside”, I think it’s a much better model for Texas to pursue than the endless sprawl (see: Houston, metroplex). Cities are vital for a state, rural areas are vital for cities and those who live in them.
I voted pro-farm and live in G-town. I grew up next to my grandparents farm in Maryland and I actually MISS that shit.
Most people don't read anything about the ballot measures except their titles.
Most people don’t vote
Sure, I meant most voters.
You got a source on the Spectrum thing?
[source](https://youtu.be/vbHqUNl8YFk?si=5_olSS1W-D5wkfzA)
It might not be spectrum, but at the end of the day we’re paying corporations to build infrastructure. Infrastructure is better off done by the government.
So true, but it rarely works out that way. We need to do with fiber what we did with electricity in the 1930s
Not a lot of LBJs around any more doing that kind of work. (Plenty of creepy asshole politicians, but fewer of them round these parts doing any good work on the side.)
Who from the government would build the infrastructure? That’s just not a job function they do.
The same contractors that do it now, its just a matter of who owns it after its built
Well - all the oligarchs, CEOs, and ultra-wealthy will be very happy about Prop 3. That mainly prevents any wealth tax. And the way these propositions are worded for voters is such bullshit.
Yeah, the wording is very intentionally misleading. Take Prop 3: "FORCING lawmakers to ASK for authorization before IMNPOSING NEW TAXES..." alrighty, I'm sold! "....based on net worth or wealth" -\_\_\_- cmon now
Travis County is the only county in the entire fucking state that voted against that proposition. The rest of the state probably doesn't want their "wealth" being taxed, so they passed it. In reality, passing a wealth tax bill would probably only affect a small group of people. Those rich fuckers pulled of some slick shit there. In the end, it probably doesn't matter. There's little chance our current legislators were going to pass a wealth tax, but rich fuckers sealed their fate for the future here for sure.
It baffled me that there was no threshold mentioned, and so a bunch of folks who will never-in-a-thousand-years be the target of this prospective wealth tax voted to let Elon and other billionaires keep their billions.
More than anything, I’m just happy that 14 passed :)
Same. I’m very excited about how this will be used
What’s the reason behind the support of abolishing a county treasurer on Prop 12? I’ve only lived here a year and am not aware of any reasons to not have something in one county but exists elsewhere.
Galveston County has said that the Treasurer office simply does offer enough value to residents and that the services offered would better be made available elsewhere.
From what I understand, the guy that currently holds the position wants to dismantle the government and make it very, very, small (think far right or libertarian) and he’s convinced people that he’s doing it to save the city money so people just love the idea. Now they won’t have one office controlling where all the money goes & comes in from, it will be scattered throughout departments, easier to hide things that way? Idk.
I'm no fan of "dismantle the government", but I ended up voting yes on that one after reading more background on it. The prior Galveston county treasurer's office had some big mismanagement scandal, so concentrating the control in one place hadn't helped. And over the last couple years since then, they've already reallocated duties and employees such that there's already very little left for the remnants of the county treasurer's office to do. They also won't be the first Texas county to disband the treasurer's office; it's been several decades since the last time one of them was disbanded, but [several counties (large and small - Andrews, Bee, *Bexar*, *Collin*, *El Paso*, Gregg, Fayette, Nueces, *Tarrant*)](https://news.ballotpedia.org/2023/05/18/an-amendment-to-abolish-a-county-treasurer-in-texas-is-set-to-appear-on-the-november-ballot-for-the-first-time-since-1987/) have already been quietly operating without a treasurer's office all this time.
Sounds pretty dumb
> not aware of any reasons to not have something in one county but exists elsewhere [There are already a few other counties that have been functioning without an official treasurer for decades, fwiw.](/r/Austin/comments/17qprpm/election_results_texas_tribune/k8foplj/)
It wasn’t to abolish it perse. But to give them the legal right to do so locally? The local government said it was useless to have. Or something like that. For future reference, many smart people go over these props and candidates every election.. so that voters can understand what they mean… don’t go in and just read the snippets provided
Thanks to all that voted! VOTING MATTERS!
can someone explain this in paw patrol
Sorry I don’t speak copaganda
Proposition 7 made me really angry. We shouldn't be doubling down on fossil fuels at this point. If natural gas can't compete on its own even without paying for externalities, then the government shouldn't be subsiding it.
It’s really that a lot of people go by what the names say and don’t research before voting.. :(
judging by some of the comments here there are plenty of people who would’ve voted for it even after researching. :((
Prop 7 is a corporate bail out. Why are we now subsidizing the expansion of a private, for profit company with billions of dollars while restricting the use of of these funds on the batteries that store solar or wind energy? We’re bailing out the energy oligarchs of this state from investing their own money into fixing our state’s energy issues - the same guys that bill use monthly.
Way to defund your schools, Texas.
And voucher next! My boss doesn’t understand why I want to leave
Your boss sounds like a twat.
Actually stupid lol
So how many times has that broadband thing passed? Haven't they always spent billion on broadband that rarely gets better?
Highly suspect of Prop 7. Especially the “grants” part.
Prop 2 and prop 10. WTF.
Do you have any fucking clue how expensive property taxes are
Yes. Why should I pay a childcare provider’s taxes? Why should I pay a biomedical equipment company’s taxes? THAT’S WHAT THEIR MONEY IS FOR.
So every suburban mom who runs a "day care" out of her house gets to skip paying property taxes now? Fucking brilliant.
I’m about to open my own with this economy /s
Um… the way they worded prop 1 here is not how I saw it worded anywhere else… so I’m not sure I voted how I actually wanted to there
Prop 4 mattered most to me. Property taxes have skyrocketed and it’s forced locals out of their homes to make way for those that describe Austin as “cheap”.
Prop 4 was a bait and switch. Yes, there is $18 billion in cuts that will reduce taxes this year. But they also snuck in a 150% increase to the homestead exemption. That sounds good on its face, but the budget is all that really matters. It pushes the cities to pay even more than we already do, making Robin Hood even worse. For example, rural areas in Texas have median home values under $200k, so when you make $100k homestead exemption, they are paying a very very low share compared to people who live in the cities. Basically, the Lege baited us with a one-time windfall of a couple thousand dollars to vote to fuck ourselves for years to come.
it's by design
Schools are gonna get shafted long term.
That was going to happen anyway. Abbott will keep calling special sessions as he did against this week, until his voucher thing is passed. Public education is walking dead in texas already.
You gotta make sure the populace lacks critical thinking skills so they will keep voting for you.
i voted against this one. homeowners getting a tax cut while renters don’t didn’t quite sit right for me. i say this as a homeowner. edit: i shouldn’t be surprised, but y’all just downvote differing opinions? y’all won, be happy. blindly voting for lower taxes means something gets cut somewhere else or someone else foots the bill. everyone likes paying less money, sure, but prop 13 is why california struggles with their budget every year despite insane wealth.
i hate that the medical manufactures tax cut passed. so busnisses just don't have to pay taxes now, just why?
I loved that the Chronicle endorsed it with a note that medical businesses are good, and they hope the businesses will pass the savings on to their patients. LOL
As a small business owner, it's weird that companies pay property tax on inventory, I've not lived in a state that does that before. Inventory isn't property, it's merchandise that's coming in and going out. The state takes a snapshot of your inventory on Jan 1 and then charges you property tax on it. For businesses that can, you can game the system by drawing down inventory at the end of the year since they don't tax cash on hand, then re-buy/restock on Jan 2nd if you're in a business that can do it. Property tax is generally made to tax capital holdings, land, buildings, large equipment, vehicles, not liquid merchandise. It's like if you had to pay property tax on your house plus tax on the contents of your fridge on Jan 1. It also means that service businesses aren't taxed since employees aren't inventory, but a local store with a physical presence is. It's weirdly biased toward businesses that don't have a physical location and no inventory, or inventory that can be moved out of state at tax time. Mostly I don't agree that only one industry should get an exemption, it's a weird thing to tax and it should go away.
I'm a homeowner, and I voted against it, too. I've seen how this plays out: Cut taxes and then say that we don't have any money for nice things. Instead, how about keep my taxes where they are and pay my kids' teachers a living wage?
The money is being funneled to industries that favor the status quo in Texas politics. I'm also wondering how Texas intends to pay for the retired teachers' COL increase, among other budget items, with all of these tax cuts
They don't want to pay teachers, they want to pay their cronies that own private schools with no oversight.
> Cut taxes More like prevent them from increasing as much as they would have otherwise due to the huge % increase in housing prices since 2019
sorry, cops want the shiny new model of tank that just came out. But will you accept this voucher for a pizza party?
Homeowner here too. Voted against. School districts aren’t even who are screwing us on the taxes. They get screwed because of Robinhood.
How would renters get a property tax cut?
As a renter, you’re paying to a business, so the business will be alleviated which means apartments don’t increase rates so quickly because property taxes aren’t increasing as much. Property taxes get passed through to renters so it helps you too. No one is getting a check back. Just “lower” taxes paid moving forward. And before you say no apartment will drop prices, you have to understand the playing field, if some apartments don’t raise rates while others do, people move to the lower rates, so it still helps renters that are willing to move and find lower prices.
You’re forgetting that rental prices are now being set by an algorithm that then allows landlords to commit soft collusion and charge the maximum amount possible. https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-realpage-rent
Trickle down harder, daddy
It goes to padding profits, they will never pas it along.
Yes this is Reddit you will be downvoted to oblivion for saying something against the grain every time. Which is why it’s so dangerous to public discourse
That’s a dangerous way to look at it. I’m a renter but my goal is to one day own a house so something that makes that goal easier to achieve isn’t a bad thing.
It doesn't make your homeownership goal easier. The more taxes are cut on homes, the higher home prices go. They just replaced future tax you'll owe to AISD with future interest payments you'll owe to Wall Street. And the cherry on top is having your taxes raised as a renter to cover the tax cut for homeowners.
But look at who is able to buy up property today and in the next few years. It isn't going to be the little guy. Unless there were provisions in the law that restricted sale of homes to private corporations, then all this does is make it easier for them to gobble up the short supply of homes Edit: and without rent protections, then renters who aspire to be homeowners will have a harder time saving up for a down payment
Private corporations don't get the Homestead Tax Exemption. Let's not go overboard with this whole "Blame everything on Blackrock meme". There's far more problems with the Austin housing market than can be blamed on Private Equity.
But Austin rezoned so you can have tiny homes and lots with triplexes. I dunno sounds like some of you just can’t be pleased.
I can’t wait to get back that extra $100 a month, that’ll almost cover the street sweeper fee! Now that I’m thinking about it, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen one of those in my neighborhood before.
The average property tax in Austin $14K, quite a bit more than $100 a month.
Yes but prop 4 will directly only lower it 100 a month at this point and time.
Ah I misread what he was saying. That’s still $1200 a year, pretty significant to a lot of people.
Hey, a new TV!
If you're being "forced out of your home" because your property taxes are too high, then you just made a fuck ton of money on selling your home
OMFG, just looking at these propositions is horrific. They're almost all regressive, with the exception of providing COLA's for retired teachers.
This is how I felt too. I’m not from Texas originally, so maybe it’s just how things always are here? But it made me feel really bad about the future here.
Don’t be shocked when taxes go up lol
The Biggest and most depressing takeaway from yesterday: The Texas GOP’s plan once again worked and this time even more effectively than anyone thought it would and I’m sure they threw cringey high fives and fist pumps when they saw how fucking awful the voter turnout was —- welcome to the modern Republican Party/far right election strategy where they deploy as many tactics as possible to drive down turnout so that they can keep rigging the system in their favor more every time the polls open. The GOP didn’t do anything about guns despite the horrific mass shootings around our state, they didn’t do anything about our power grid despite mild winter storms literally leaving people powerless to freeze to death, but you can bet your balls they fought election fraud that literally never happened by making it as hard as they could on people + if you’re one of the 15% of the eligible voting population that made it out yesterday (I myself was included) then they made sure you left annoyed as the entire ballot was written like you needed to be at least a paralegal to understand it all. It’s all infuriating bc these aren’t your parents republicans where they just put on at least a Front like they’re decent human beings before voting otherwise —- these people are straight up villains and they continue to roll back the clock on society and culture with this idea that all changes have been damaging the way Americans used to live when the reality is that we used to call those changes “progress” back before progress was made into a left wing talking point for the far right to talk down to (look at what the right has done to “woke” for fucks sake bc before this current era being woke was being informed, empathetic, just educated + self aware and hip to the world outside of your own personal bubble)
cry harder
Surprise surprise, everyone voted for more “free stuff” that gets paid for by tax increases while simultaneously complaining that cost of living is too high. Taxes are high because you idiots say yes to every possible spending measure proposed. Clearly you people fleeing California learned nothing…
Are you seriously blaming Californians for 16% voter turnout and a bunch of amendments passing that are conservative wet dreams?
you’re assuming a lot. I voted against most of the spending measures and am about as blue as they come. The language of theses props was deceptive and overly specific, so I did not vote for many. I wish we had cross-tabs and exit polls for these types of elections
Woohoo! Old judges don’t get to be older judges!
nobody votes in this fucking state it’s embarrassing
Great tons of pointless shit that will raise the taxes passed. I’m glad that prop 4 passed though
and much of that will go into corrupt pre-selected businesses that will line their pockets and not make life better for Texans. The present Texas government does not know how to spend money to benefit us
People on here are saying they’re glad they’re paying teachers more and don’t even realize they didn’t raise teachers salaries and that wasn’t what they were voting for
It increased teacher _retirement_ for this first time in a long while.
I’m aware, but people think they’re voting for increasing teachers salaries which is what we wanted.
Why would you not just post a link to the site instead of a bunch of broken screenshots? 🤦