Amendment 13 on La Ballot

Same with 3. Apparently elected tax collectors can't manage to collect delinquent taxes so they want to hire contractors. These contractors would receive 10%... wonder who'll end up with those contracts.

yes on 8 and 9

no on everything else.


I always err on the side of NO for amendments. Think about it. Who proposes them? The legislature. Are they smart? No

I only voted "yes" for only 7 and 9.

quote:

---

yes on 8 and 9

---

Curious why you voted yes on these 2.

I only voted yes on 7.

8, seems like a good way for the Marsh parish governments to build up a slush fund. Give Nungesser more taxpayer funded hunting/fishing land.

9 just seems like it's increasing the chance of fraud.

I don't vote for Constitutional Amendments. They're a joke and tactics used by the Legislature to get a end around on the Executive Branch and avoid vetoes.

Elections have consequences for the Legislature, and so does repeated acquiescence to the 4th Floor. Stand up and others will stand with you, and the power of the Legislative Branch in-state would force more cooperation from the Executive Branch.

Instead, they never stand up or hold the 4th Floor accountable so they put forth Amendments to get people to vote for Legislation they are afraid of the Governor vetoing. We need to reform our Constitution which protects all but two pieces of funding from cuts and was written by Camille Gravel decades ago.

Vote no for all Constitutional Amendments and email your Legislator to do their jobs and stop asking us to essentially pass legislation for you by bastardizing our outdated Constitution further and further.

thanks for the explanation!

quote:

---

I only voted yes on 7.

---

The only one I'm on the fence about... will prob vote yes.

No on all others.

quote:

---

8, seems like a good way for the Marsh parish governments to build up a slush fund. Give Nungesser more taxpayer funded hunting/fishing land. 9 just seems like it's increasing the chance of fraud.

---

8 is the perfect example of something that doesn't belong in the state constitution. Maybe it sounds good in principle, but pass a statute if you want something like that to become law.

As for 9, it's not too much to ask of someone to prove their income is what they say it is once a year, especially if he/she is getting a break because of it.

5,10, and 14 are legit to me. I'm on the fence about 3 and 7. Part of me feels like privatization is a good thing, but as mentioned above, if 3 passes, it'll probably end up in corruption in this state. As for 7, my soft side will probably make me vote for it.

quote:

---

wonder who'll end up with those contracts.

---

Exactly. And who's to say the property valuation can't be boosted to make that 10% a little bigger.

Why don't some of you like the amendment removing the mandatory retirement age for judges? Just because you don't feel like it should be in the Constitution or you actually agree with the mandatory retirement age?