- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Louisiana constitutional amendments; 2020 edition
Posted on 10/2/20 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 10/2/20 at 2:21 pm
quote:PAR's guide to understanding all of this stuff
Amendment 1 “Do you support an amendment declaring that, to protect human life, a right to abortion and the funding of abortion shall not be found in the Louisiana Constitution?”
Amendment 2 “Do you support an amendment to permit the
presence or production of oil or gas to be included in the methodology used to determine the fair market value of an oil or gas well for the purpose of property assessment?”
Amendment 3 “Do you support an amendment to allow for the use of the Budget Stabilization Fund, also known as the Rainy Day Fund, for state costs associated with a disaster declared by the federal government?”
Amendment 4 “Do you support an amendment to limit the
growth of the expenditure limit for the state general fund and dedicated funds and to remove the calculation of its growth factor from the Constitution?”
Amendment 5“Do you support an amendment to authorize local governments to enter into cooperative endeavor ad valorem tax exemption agreements with new or expanding manufacturing establishments for payments in lieu of taxes?”
Amendment 6 “Do you support an amendment to increase the maximum amount of income a person may receive and still qualify for the special assessment level for residential property receiving the homestead exemption?”
Amendment 7 “Do you support an amendment to create the
Louisiana Unclaimed Property Permanent Trust Fund to preserve the money that remains unclaimed by its owner or owners?”
Proposition Shall sports wagering activities and operations be permitted in the parish of ______?
I really do not care what your positions are on the amendments, but I do care about you being informed on them before election day. It drives me nuts to see and hear people complain about needing to fix Louisiana and then just voting no on all the amendments because they did not want to read them or think about them. Please do Louisiana a favor and actually read the amendments and the arguments for or against and then make your decision.
This post was edited on 10/2/20 at 4:22 pm
22
Posted on 10/2/20 at 2:33 pm to WeeWee
Get out of here with that "educated vote" nonsense, this is the PT!
But seriously, this should probably be reposted every so often until election day. These things can be complicated.
But seriously, this should probably be reposted every so often until election day. These things can be complicated.
Posted on 10/2/20 at 2:36 pm to WeeWee
Thanks for the PSA>
Posted on 10/2/20 at 2:39 pm to BigJim
quote:
Get out of here with that "educated vote" nonsense, this is the PT!
True. We need orange man approves of this or orange man does not approve of this rating for each of the amendments.
quote:
But seriously, this should probably be reposted every so often until election day. These things can be complicated.
Request a sticky.
Posted on 10/2/20 at 2:44 pm to WeeWee
english please.
I'm an intelligent person and I have trouble wading through these amendments, I can only imagine what the unintelligent and uninformed are thinking reading these amendments.
ETA: I would not mind having a discussion thread for each one. I know how I initially feel about each one except for 2, but I wouldn't mind people pointing thing I may not be thinking about.
I'm an intelligent person and I have trouble wading through these amendments, I can only imagine what the unintelligent and uninformed are thinking reading these amendments.
ETA: I would not mind having a discussion thread for each one. I know how I initially feel about each one except for 2, but I wouldn't mind people pointing thing I may not be thinking about.
This post was edited on 10/2/20 at 2:50 pm
Posted on 10/2/20 at 3:08 pm to LSUSkip
quote:
english please.
I'm an intelligent person and I have trouble wading through these amendments, I can only imagine what the unintelligent and uninformed are thinking reading these amendments.
That is what the PAR guide is for. It is the link that I put in the OP. They explain the amendments, the current position and how the amendments would change the situation, and summarize the arguments for and against each amendment. It is less than 30 pages and takes less than an hour to read. It is basically a Louisiana constitutional amendments for dummies.
Posted on 10/2/20 at 3:09 pm to WeeWee
The first one is really bizarre. If they want to put a ban on abortion in the constitution... then just put a ban in the constitution. Saying "there is no right to..." is just a weird way of phrasing it and everytime the LA legis writes something in a weird way, it bites us in the arse.
Two through seven do not belong in the constitution. Those belong in revised statues, at best. Really, 2, 5, and 6 should not even be state issues at all, those should be local issues. I will vote against all of these.
I will support the proposition in my parish.
Two through seven do not belong in the constitution. Those belong in revised statues, at best. Really, 2, 5, and 6 should not even be state issues at all, those should be local issues. I will vote against all of these.
I will support the proposition in my parish.
Posted on 10/2/20 at 3:11 pm to LSUSkip
quote:
english please.
I'm an intelligent person and I have trouble wading through these amendments, I can only imagine what the unintelligent and uninformed are thinking reading these amendments.
Ballotpedia Readability Scores by State
quote:
Readability index details
Ballotpedia uses two formulas, the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), to compute scores for the titles and summaries of ballot measures. The FRE formula produces a score between a negative number and 100, with the highest score (100) representing a 5th-grade equivalent reading level and scores at or below zero representing college graduate-equivalent reading level. Therefore, the higher the score, the easier the text is to read. The FKGL formula produces a score equivalent to the estimated number of years of U.S. education required to understand a text. A score of five estimates that a U.S. 5th grade student would be able to read and comprehend a text, while a score of 20 estimates that a person with 20 years of U.S. formal education would be able to read and comprehend a text. Ballotpedia uses Readable.io to calculate the scores.
quote:
Oklahoma measures had the lowest average readability score at grade level 9.
New Mexico measures had the highest average readability score at grade level 28.
Colorado had both the highest score and lowest score for individual measures, with one at grade level 5 and one at grade level 95. Colorado had the second-highest level of variation in readability scores between measures.
Only four states—Oklahoma, Connecticut, North Carolina, and South Dakota—had average readability scores equivalent to a high school grade level (9-12) in the U.S. All other states measured had scores above a high school grade level.
quote:
Louisiana 61(measures) 17 (mean) Master's degree(Mean US Equivalent) 6.8844 (Standard Deviation) 8 (Min) 44 (Max)
Posted on 10/2/20 at 3:19 pm to WeeWee
quote:
Request a sticky.
Done!
Posted on 10/2/20 at 3:21 pm to WeeWee
Jesus could we word these at an 8th grade reading level and not like we all go to Southern Law School?
Posted on 10/2/20 at 3:37 pm to WeeWee
Bookmarked does I can do more research
Thanks for posting
Thanks for posting
Posted on 10/2/20 at 3:46 pm to WeeWee
quote:
Amendment 1 “Do you support an amendment declaring that, to protect human life, a right to abortion and the funding of abortion shall not be found in the Louisiana Constitution?”
Yes
quote:
Amendment 2 “Do you support an amendment to permit the presence or production of oil or gas to be included in the methodology used to determine the fair market value of an oil or gas well for the purpose of property assessment?”
No. Oil and gas revenues are already taxed.
quote:
Amendment 3 “Do you support an amendment to allow for the use of the Budget Stabilization Fund, also known as the Rainy Day Fund, for state costs associated with a disaster declared by the federal government?”
Undecided. I can see plusses and minuses for this one.
quote:
Amendment 4 “Do you support an amendment to limit the growth of the expenditure limit for the state general fund and dedicated funds and to remove the calculation of its growth factor from the Constitution?”
Yes. It’s high time we got rid of the automatic increases every year.
quote:
Amendment 5“Do you support an amendment to authorize local governments to enter into cooperative endeavor ad valorem tax exemption agreements with new or expanding manufacturing establishments for payments in lieu of taxes?”
Sounds like more local control for ITEP-esque projects. Could be good or bad, but on its face, I can support it. I would like to read more about the potential consequences before I vote, though.
quote:
Amendment 6 “Do you support an amendment to increase the maximum amount of income a person may receive and still qualify for the special assessment level for residential property receiving the homestead exemption?”
Undecided. What is the income threshold now and what is the proposed increase?
quote:
Amendment 7 “Do you support an amendment to create the Louisiana Unclaimed Property Permanent Trust Fund to preserve the money that remains unclaimed by its owner or owners?” Proposition Shall sports wagering activities and operations be permitted in the parish of ______?
Yes
Posted on 10/2/20 at 4:00 pm to kingbob
quote:
No. Oil and gas revenues are already taxed.
With severance taxes, yes. This amendment would allow an "income approach" to ad valorem taxation of the physical wells. Kind of like how an "income approach" can be used for ad valorem taxation of rental properties. An income approach would probably make these wells have a higher valuation, i.e. higher property taxes. That might be a good reason to vote no.
quote:
Sounds like more local control for ITEP-esque projects. Could be good or bad, but on its face, I can support it. I would like to read more about the potential consequences before I vote, though.
PILOTs are basically ways to redirect ad valorem tax revenue (can also be used for sales tax revenue). So instead of a property tax stream going to a bunch of different dedicated measures, they can direct the payment to go to more specific causes. For example, developer wants to build shopping center, needs new public roads and lights / traffic signals to get to center. Parish takes out a bond to pay for that. PILOT proceeds are used to pay off that specific bond, used for that specific project.
I know of a specific parish councilman that was interested in doing something like this in regards to a plant expansion / ITEP application, and what he was told by the state was the parish could not do that. This amendment seemingly would give them the authority to do it.
Posted on 10/2/20 at 4:20 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
No. Oil and gas revenues are already taxed.
With severance taxes, yes. This amendment would allow an "income approach" to ad valorem taxation of the physical wells. Kind of like how an "income approach" can be used for ad valorem taxation of rental properties. An income approach would probably make these wells have a higher valuation, i.e. higher property taxes. That might be a good reason to vote no.
Yes but for older wells or less productive wells it might mean lower taxes. I don't know if the proposed system is better than the current system or not. However, Louisiana's current system is so f**ked up that the O&G industry and tax assessors agree that it needs to be changed. It is very rare to see industry and tax assessors agreeing to change something. That fact alone makes me want to support it, but I have not made up my mind because I need to do some more research on the issue.
This post was edited on 10/2/20 at 4:24 pm
Posted on 10/2/20 at 4:28 pm to WeeWee
I will vote NO on all 7.
I will vote FOR the gambling prop in EBRP.
We need a new state constitution.
I will vote FOR the gambling prop in EBRP.
We need a new state constitution.
This post was edited on 10/2/20 at 4:29 pm
Posted on 10/2/20 at 4:30 pm to WeeWee
I feel like an idiot. I still need more clarification on the first one, on abortion. I am more pro life than not and don’t believe tax payers should be paying for abortions.
Do I vote yes or no?!?!?
Do I vote yes or no?!?!?
Posted on 10/2/20 at 4:34 pm to WeeWee
quote:
Yes but for older wells or less productive wells it might mean lower taxes.
In theory I understand this, but you would need to have a marginal well with a high replacement cost for that to happen. It could happen for sure.
They are both agreeing to change it because most other states use an income approach. Honestly, that would probably be the "best" way here too. But, if they are going to do that, it likely won't overall be revenue neutral.
Posted on 10/2/20 at 4:36 pm to Lsutiger2424
quote:
I feel like an idiot. I still need more clarification on the first one, on abortion. I am more pro life than not and don’t believe tax payers should be paying for abortions.
Do I vote yes or no?!?!?
Voting yes means the intention is that the courts could not come back at some point and say "oh look Article X etc can be used to say a woman has the right to an abortion in Louisiana".
You aren't an idiot (well maybe you are, lol, but not on this issue). I addressed this earlier. The language is absurd and makes me question if there is something else going on here.
Posted on 10/2/20 at 4:43 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
The language is absurd and makes me question if there is something else going on here.
Maybe it is as simple as the waterboy's father (aka JBE) is writing the law or maybe the lawyers are writing them vague as shite to allow for the most room to ignore voter's intentions and open up avenues for corruption.
Posted on 10/2/20 at 5:06 pm to kingbob
quote:
Amendment 2
quote:
No. Oil and gas revenues are already taxed.
From the link
quote:
Assessors and the oil and gas industry came together to create this amendment after decades of disagreement. This amendment is narrow and does not affect severance taxes. The amendment only allows the income approach to be considered when assessing an oil or gas well, along with the market and cost approaches. It will mean that newer, richer wells will tend to be valued higher than older, poorer wells, which is not necessarily the case now. This change will give the local assessors and the Tax Commission the tools they need to assess wells logically and fairly. It could reduce litigation. It may lessen the unfair tax burden on some low producers. A mere statute will not suffice and there is no foreseeable resolution outside of a constitutional amendment. No one spoke against the amendment during committee hearings.
Based on this I think yes
quote:
Sounds like more local control for ITEP-esque projects. Could be good or bad, but on its face, I can support it. I would like to read more about the potential consequences before I vote, though.
Check out the link, it has good info
Just need to print & read through it all
This post was edited on 10/2/20 at 5:08 pm
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News