Jump to Navigation

another elected office

Too many positions already overwhelm voters. We cannot add more without a plan to cut ballot complexity.

Property Taxes

Strengthening the Economy > Tax Burden > Property Taxes
We favor abolishing property taxes. Until ad valorem taxes are abolished, we recommend that property valuations be fixed for not less than three years following each revaluation. Appraisal Boards should be elected. We urge four board members be elected by commissioners court precinct, and one member elected county-wide.
(plank deleted)

Property taxes are a sound and relevant taxing tool. They are even supported in The Federalist Papers. There is little (any?) mainstream conservative support for abolishing them.

It is unclear how a 3-year-at-a-time freeze would benefit Texans. They don't effectively temper growth, and they risk trapping Texans with high valuations if property values declined substantially in the 3 years after valuation.

Fault:
0 comments

State Board of Education

Educating Our Children > State Board of Education
We support an elected State Board of Education (SBOE) with authority over the Texas Education Agency, selection and termination of the Commissioner of Education, and textbook adoption. The SBOE must retain constitutional authority over the Permanent School Fund. TheThe state should offer subject-area teacher certification without additional educational requirements for individuals who hold a baccalaureate in their field or professionals who have equivalent life experience in a field. We urge that the Legislature repeal Education Code 28.008 and 28.009; and that the legislature instead work within the established framework of the Texas Education code and the authority of the State Board of Education.

There is no reason to have yet more elected officials.

People without college degrees should not teach in public schools.

Texas Education Code sections 28.008 and 28.009 force districts to take college preparation seriously. This is good. Proposing their removal contradicts with the Knowledge-Based Education plank that opposes "job training" in public schools.

Fault:
0 comments

DFPS Accountability

Strengthening Families, Protecting Life and Promoting Health > Assisting Families to Self Sufficiency > DFPS Accountability
Children must only be removed from parent custody due to immediate danger to the child's physical health or safety or pursuant to a court order. No child may be interviewed by the state without video or audio recording of the interview, and the recording shall become evidence. No child may be removed from parental custody solely on the basis of an anonymous tip.We support the appointment of local elected officials to review charges of abuse of discretion by the Department of Family and Protective Services with respect to intervention into the family unit. It is imperative that this local board have the authority to recommend appropriate corrective and disciplinary action as needed. We believe that only law enforcement officers may remove a child from his or her home or school when there is an immediate danger to the child's physical health or safety. All other removals of a child shall be pursuant to a court order. No child may be interviewed by the state without video or audio recording of the interview, and the recording shall become evidence. DFPS/CPS will require the tipster to identify themself by name and contact information to the agency. This information will be kept confidential, and the tipster will be notified by the agency that false information will be prosecuted and that false tips will be subject to a fine. A family shall have the right to learn of their accuser with a judicial order. Only findings determined in open court and by trial may be retained by the State.

The core problem is when unsubstantiated, anonymous tips are used as justification for child removal.

Local board of elected officials are just additional layers of bureaucracy. Our elected legislative representatives, the governor, and the court system are the appropriate venues for handling unresolvable greviances.

It is not clear why law enforcement officers are the only ones who should remove children.

Fault:
0 comments

Public Integrity Unit

Preserving American Freedom > Restoring Integrity to Our Elections > Public Integrity Unit
We call for transferring statewide public official investigative and prosecution responsibilities from the Travis County Public Integrity Unit to a statewide entity.We urge the Legislature to secure the impartiality and probity of the Travis County Public Integrity Unit, by transferring its powers and funding to an impartial statewide elected judicial entity.

This should not be an elected position.

Fault:
4 comments

Direct Election of State Judges

Preserving American Freedom > Reforming the Judicial System > Direct Election of State Judges
Texas should transition to merit appointments and retention elections for state judges.We support our right to select our judges by direct vote.

Straight party ticketing, not the candidate's merit, decides downballot elections like judges. On presidential election years, judges are elected only if they are in the same party as the president who carried their jurisdiction. Exceptions are rare. This is a terrible way to elect an important position.

Furthermore, the need to raise money corrupts judicial independence.

Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Jefferson (R) says: "(T)he State of our Judiciary will be made stronger if we appoint our judges based on merit, and hold them accountable in retention elections," Jefferson said. "To those who say we cannot achieve this lofty goal, I have three words: Yes we can." (source) Former Chief Justices Hill (D) and Phillips (D) share the desire for merit appointments.

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor says: "If I could do one thing to protect judicial independence in this country, it would be to convince those states that still elect their judges to adopt a merit selection system ..." (source)

The current system of elected judges is awful and cannot be retained.

Fault:
0 comments

Environment, Property Ownership, and Natural Resources

Preserving American Freedom > Limiting the Expanse of Government Power > Environment, Property Ownership, and Natural Resources
We believe in the right to own property with minimal governmental interference. It is the source of the nation's wealth and the backbone of our free enterprise system. We oppose federalization of Texas lands and watersheds. We oppose vast acquisition of land to protect endangered species. We oppose the politicization of science, especially when it leads to reduced property rights.We reaffirm our belief in the constitutional concept of the right to own property without governmental interference. We believe that property ownership is the source of the nation's wealth; free enterprise forms the foundation of our collective wealth; local stewardship of our natural resources is best; sound science trumps politically correct science; groundwater is a vested ownership right; the state should not abridge or deny our inalienable property and mineral rights; in state control of state resources; in opposing nationalization of lands and watersheds; in opposing conservation easements on our natural resources administered by organizations unaccountable to voters; in opposing vast acquisition of Texas land by government agencies to protect endangered species; in allowing states to consider costs when comparing emission control techniques; in election of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality chairman; and in eliminating the Endangered Species Act.

There will always be some government interference in property ownership, such as deeds and property taxes for real estate or the requirement to maintain emissions control systems on vehicles. "without governmental interference" is unrealistic.

Much of this plank is a grab bag of disjointed, random statements, some of which have little to do with the plank's subject.

"in allowing states to consider costs when comparing emission control techniques": that is already happening. For example, when faced with Clean Air Act violations, the EPA allowed the TCEQ to coordinate local governments to determine air quality improvement measures. The EPA merely validated the plan's soundness.

We have far too many ballot positions already. We do not need more, especially for administrative departments under gubernatorial control like the TCEQ.

Fault:
0 comments
Syndicate content

Random plank

Preserving American Freedom > Limiting the Expanse of Government Power > Annexation
Residents of an area to be annexed into a city may vote on annexation.All parties in annexation proceedings should be guaranteed these referenda: Residents of an area to be annexed may vote on annexation, and voters of the jurisdiction proposing annexation must authorize the proposal.
Reason:

An earlier plank calls for preservation of representative democracy. Forcing a city vote on annexation usurps this model.

It is appropriate for "annex-ees" to have a voice through a direct vote since they had no representative in the jurisdiction into which they are being annexed.

Need to clarify that this is for cities only. This stems from controversy from Houston's annexation of areas to its north.

contradictory, wordy

Problems

Show problem parts of the platform:
Platforms promote principles and policies. Planks must not push particular polymorphic political proposals, including bills.about a specific bill (6)
Parts of these were recently implemented.accomplished (11)
Parts of these only promote limited religious viewpoints.advances religious doctrine (8)
Too many positions already overwhelm voters. We cannot add more without a plan to cut ballot complexity.another elected office (6)
The GOP should not be a virulent, anti-homosexual crusade.anti-homosexual crusade (6)
These destroy useful customs or start us down slippery slopes.bad precedent (17)
Cliches belong on the playground, not in serious platforms.cliche (5)
These contradict other planks.contradictory (13)
These simply go too far, overshooting a rational remedy.extreme (25)
These have factual errors.incorrect (11)
These planks advanced contemporary liberal causes or expand government.leftist (22)
These planks require belief in something that is untrue.misinformed (18)
These are not appropriate for a platform document.misuse of platform (6)
These planks have minor punctuation or grammatical errors.needs copyedit (8)
These problems were fixed before the 2008 platform was published.no longer relevant (3)
"Black helicopters" and paranoid conspiracy have no place in our party.paranoid (15)
Parts of these do nothing useful.pointless (61)
These proposals would make our kids stupider.reduces education quality (3)
These planks are internally redundant or repeat other parts of the platform.redundant (41)
These planks should propose a more general solution.too specific (6)
These planks are unclear or unfocused.vague (19)
Puffy prose, hackneyed phrases, and obscure words create pinheaded, unfocused, and inaccessible platforms. Platforms must be simple and direct.wordy (47)

Recent comments