Constitutional Guide for the November 8 Election

Photo source: BRProud

Photo source: BRProud

Republican National Committeeman Ross Little issued a guide on Sunday regarding the six Louisiana constitutional amendments that are on the ballot in the November election.  Little has suggested YES on 2 of these amendments and NO on everything else.  The body of his email is included below:

Amendment 1.  NO. Lets' mess up the Registar of Voters.  This is an awful proposal. It would mess up Registrars of Voters everywhere by silly do-gooder requirements placed on Parishes in hiring Registrars.  

The supposed idea is to "professionalize" registrars by adding various requirements to registrars.  It's a bad idea.  When in business, I fought against this my entire career.  Many wanted to require college degrees for almost everything. The problem is that universites have become headquarters for liberals everywhere.

What will soon mean:  Lots of expensive, and mostly useless, "Continuing Education," which means taxpayers will have to pay for registrars to take expensive trips and endure more drivel from liberal "presenters."

The registrars will be unduly influenced by these folks and things will get worse from there.

In case you didn't know, liberals want to "federalize" voter registration.

Think there is voter fraud now?  Just wait until the feds take over.  Here are A Few of their Bad Ideas.

So - please vote NO.

Amendment 2. YES.  Tuition autonomy.  Colleges and universities are heavily subsidized by taxpayers.  It would be better for students to pay their own expenses.  This would allow universities to do a bit more of that.

Of course, taxpayers will continue to pay a significant cost of college tuition.

This is just a very small step.

As a reminder -- Bernie Sanders wants supposedly "free" college for all  -- which means the taxpayers will pay for the vast waste at Universities.

This proposal is the opposite of the Bernie Sanders approach.

It's a good idea.

Vote YES!

Amendment 3. NO. Increase taxes on businesses. This proposal would increase taxes on businesses by taking away vital tax deductions.

In this case, businesses could no longer deduct federal income taxes paid.

Why they want this:  Now, if federal taxes go up, state taxes go down.  This is great for taxpayers but state lawmakers would rather have the extra money to dole out. This proposal would mean that even as federal taxes go up, state taxes would also go up.

It's a bad idea.

Some estimate that businesses would pay another $30 million per year.  Others claim it would be revenue neutral.

Taxes are already too high.  We need to lower, not raise taxes.

What proponents will argue -- this is a flat tax of 6.5% on business, which is lower for some and higher for others.

My answer -- then why are taxes expected to increase up to $30 million per year?

Why not decrease taxes for all businesses?

Just say NO.

Amendment 4. NO. Tax Exemption for our Favorite People.  This is how they get you.

They propose a tax exemption to the most deserving of people -- in this case the spouses of persons killed in the line of duty.

This whole business of exemptions is usually a bad idea.  Belly up and Vote NO.

Amendment 5. NO. Budget Stabilization Fund.  Seems almost every election we are asked to do another "stabilization fund."

This one points out that we have a big problem -- Retirement Funds for government employees.  They are out of control.  This proposal, however, would make everything worse.

We need to change government workers retirement funds to 401(k) type programs just like everyone else.  Businesses got rid of these defined beneift plans because they were way too expensive.

Let's solve the problem - not make it worse.  Please, please vote NO.

Amendment 6. NO. Convoluted plan to adjust the threshold to tap certain funds and adds new protected funds.

We have so many funds it is ridiculous.

While I like the idea of being able to tap these funds, I really dislike the idea of adding a bunch of new protected funds.

If they would have simply reduced the threshold to tap the funds, I would have said yes.  They didn't.  They also added some new protected funds.


This is a move in the wrong direction.  We should be eliminating protected funds, not creating more such funds.

Instead of all these silly protected funds, our legislators should vote on every item.  I don't like excuses like - "The constitution makes us spend money on all these ridiculous items.

Let them know that we don't want more of these funds.

Just vote NO.

Posted on October 17, 2016 and filed under Louisiana.