- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- 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
re: Nov 13 2021 La Constitutional Amendments
Posted on 10/7/21 at 10:51 am to Tigers2010a
Posted on 10/7/21 at 10:51 am to Tigers2010a
Where is the one that says "Kick Edwards out of office?"
0
Posted on 10/7/21 at 10:55 am to waiting4saturday
quote:
Holy cow, how dumb would you have to be to vote for that.
The same kind of dumb that you would have to be to vote for Biden or JBE.
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:07 am to TitleistProV1X
quote:
I want to know who the POS is that proposed amendment 4. They should be banned for life.
Amendment 4 began as HB 487 HB 487 by Rep. Echols. The only vote in opposition was by Sen. Peterson.
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:12 am to BigJim
quote:
Separately, why the dislike of amendment #1?
whats stopping them from streamlining it in the first place? do they really need to amend the constitution to get a "better working" system?
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:13 am to ssgrice
quote:
Holy cow, how dumb would you have to be to vote for that.
quote:
The same kind of dumb that you would have to be to vote for Biden or JBE.
Every Republican in the House and Senate voted for HB 487.
The only vote in opposition was by Sen. Peterson, a Democrat who supports President Biden and Governor Edwards.
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:19 am to BigJim
quote:
Separately, why the dislike of amendment #1? The business community, particularly small business, seems to be rallying behind that one.
It creates a new govt bureaucracy
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:29 am to wayak
quote:
Amendment 4 began as HB 487 HB 487 by Rep. Echols. The only vote in opposition was by Sen. Peterson.
I thought one of the biggest issues with Louisiana state budget is because it is hamstrung in moving money where it is needed due to 80% or whatever is dedicated.
Isn't this why LSU system gets cuts because they can't take money from the bloated state hospital system or any other bloated agency]
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:31 am to BigJim
quote:
why the dislike of amendment #1?
Just because you pay sales tax in your parish for Amazon purchases doesn't mean the state will give 100% of that tax to your parish. That's a problem.
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:35 am to Tigers2010a
1 No
2 Yes
3 No
4 Yes... hear me out. One of the biggest problems with our budget is the amount of statutory and Constitutionally dedicated funding. This actually gives legislators more tools to cut instead of relying on tax increases to fix our budget shortfalls. We still have idiots for legislators, so it may not help much...
2 Yes
3 No
4 Yes... hear me out. One of the biggest problems with our budget is the amount of statutory and Constitutionally dedicated funding. This actually gives legislators more tools to cut instead of relying on tax increases to fix our budget shortfalls. We still have idiots for legislators, so it may not help much...
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:39 am to wayak
quote:
quote:
Holy cow, how dumb would you have to be to vote for that.
quote:
The same kind of dumb that you would have to be to vote for Biden or JBE.
Every Republican in the House and Senate voted for HB 487.
The only vote in opposition was by Sen. Peterson, a Democrat who supports President Biden and Governor Edwards.
This isn't very surprising. Probably 1% of all politicians are honest and do what is morally right, dems and repubs included. If you're surprised most of them were in favor of this then you are naive/ignorant about politicians. A vote for 4 is a vote for the corruption to increase and more of it be legal.
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:42 am to BlackAdam
quote:
Yes... hear me out. One of the biggest problems with our budget is the amount of statutory and Constitutionally dedicated funding. This actually gives legislators more tools to cut instead of relying on tax increases to fix our budget shortfalls. We still have idiots for legislators, so it may not help much...
frick that. How about they :gasp: do their jobs and remove the bullshite dedicated funding parameters from the Constitution instead of implementing open-ended stop gap measures?
I can’t imagine thinking “well if they could just reallocate another 5% the budget will be sustainably fixed”, as if they won’t come back for a higher percentage in three years.
This post was edited on 10/7/21 at 11:46 am
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:45 am to Cosmo
quote:
It creates a new govt bureaucracy
It creates one bureaucracy to replace ALL local bureaucracies. Every business owner I know of is in favor of not having to write multiple checks to every local agency that taxes them.
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:45 am to Zephyrius
quote:
I thought one of the biggest issues with Louisiana state budget is because it is hamstrung in moving money where it is needed due to 80% or whatever is dedicated.
Isn't this why LSU system gets cuts because they can't take money from the bloated state hospital system or any other bloated agency]
You are correct regarding your point about dedicated funding.
As to cuts to LSU or "bloated" agencies, it is easy to say let's cut. The problem comes in when you try to identify exactly which road will not get repaired, or which group of patients will not get treatment, or which educational system will get reduced funding, or whether we will have fewer probation officers to keep track of those released from prison, or whether the Office of Motor Vehicles will only provide services 4 days a week. And so on. You show me a government office to cut, and I can show you how that will adversely affect some of our citizens. Cutting isn't easy.
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:46 am to wayak
quote:
As to cuts to LSU or "bloated" agencies, it is easy to say let's cut. The problem comes in when you try to identify exactly which road will not get repaired, or which group of patients will not get treatment, or which educational system will get reduced funding, or whether we will have fewer probation officers to keep track of those released from prison, or whether the Office of Motor Vehicles will only provide services 4 days a week. And so on. You show me a government office to cut, and I can show you how that will adversely affect some of our citizens. Cutting isn't easy.
How long have you been in the legislature, or have you been term limited out?
Posted on 10/7/21 at 11:57 am to Indefatigable
quote:
frick that. How about they :gasp: do their jobs and remove the bull shite dedicated funding parameters from the Constitution instead of implementing open-ended stop gap measures?
There are many reasons. 1 it would taken dozens of amendments which have to get 2/3 in each chamber then pass at the ballot box.
Assuming they did that... then the reason you are voting against this amendment is even more damaging. They can spend on whatever they want all the time instead of in a narrow set of circumstances.
I think this is a good governance measure that makes our shirt Constitution a bit better.
Posted on 10/7/21 at 12:08 pm to LSU316
quote:
I'm torn on 1 due to this.....a lot of small business owners I've talked to are for it. I'm 50/50 on the fence at the moment....need to do more research and talk to more people.
How about from an insider. I know a lady that does this. What's going to happen is the state would take over some of the collection of sales tax. Right now individual parishes can audit a business that's fricking the state the local parishes out of money. They often catch them doing shady shite. With this new "state version" there is no incentive to audit. They can just raise taxes on us in order to cover the shortfall. It won't eliminate all of the collection agencies. It is just going to add another level to the state side
Posted on 10/7/21 at 12:10 pm to Tigers2010a
quote:
-----LRCA Amendment 1 Taxes Amends the Louisiana Constitution to create the State and Local Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Commission
---
This is like the 4th time these assholes tried to push this through.
quote:
RCA Amendment 2 Taxes Amends the Louisiana Constitution to decrease the maximum rate of individual income tax from 6% to 4.75%
yes
quote:
-----LRCA Amendment 3 Taxes Applies a property tax limit of five mills ($5 per $1,000 of assessed value) in levee districts created after 2006 in levee districts where a majority of voters approve the 2021 constitutional amendment
no
quote:
-----LRCA Amendment 4 State budget Increases the amount of funds (from 5% to 10%) that can be redirected to a purpose other than what was originally provided for by law or as stated in the constitution during a projected budget deficit
again, 4th or 5th time these assholes have tried it
Posted on 10/7/21 at 12:21 pm to BlackAdam
quote:
1 it would taken dozens of amendments which have to get 2/3 in each chamber then pass at the ballot box.
Oh no! Not doing their job! That would require too much work.
They can spend on whatever they want all the time instead of in a narrow set of circumstances.
That is what power of the purse entails, and the spending is accountable to the voters and the internal auditing processes. Robbing Peter to pay paul does nothing but kick the can down the road.
Your argument would hold water if we were dealing with an austere and responsible body who could be trusted to make difficult decisions and enact policies in the best interest of the state. But we aren’t, so it doesn’t.
Posted on 10/7/21 at 12:40 pm to Tigers2010a
What the frick is 4?
Give us more money so we can spend it on whatever the frick we want to, the hell with rules or what it's originally intended for? frick that noise.
I've gotten to the point of it's not a decrease, then I'm voting no
Give us more money so we can spend it on whatever the frick we want to, the hell with rules or what it's originally intended for? frick that noise.
I've gotten to the point of it's not a decrease, then I'm voting no
Posted on 10/7/21 at 1:30 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Your argument would hold water if we were dealing with an austere and responsible body who could be trusted to make difficult decisions and enact policies in the best interest of the state. But we aren’t, so it doesn’t.
You fail to understand the issue. With present law they dont have to make difficult decisions. The only formula to get out of deficit is cut higher ed, cut healthcare, or raise taxes. With this amendment they could do things like across the board cuts or more cut bullshite programs with dedicated funding.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News