The Texas Constitution

The Texas Constitution: A look at the amendment process and constitutional reform in the 1970’s Article Seventeen, Section 1 of the Constitution of 1876 outlines the process for Constitutional Amendments (THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 17). Unlike the U.S. Constitution, which has two methods, Texas only has one method for Constitutional Change (Newell et al 54). In order for a proposed amendment to be considered, it first must be presented during a regular or special session of legislature (54). Once the proposed amendment is considered, it must have a two-thirds vote by all members of the House and Senate in order to move forward for ratification by the voters (Newell et al 54). If the proposed amendments receives the required two-thirds

In 1970, the Institute for Urban Studies, along with other Institutes, Universities, and Schools, Scholars and Students of Texas constitution and government provided a historical comparative and analytical annotation of the constitution, impact papers that dealt with major issues relating to the constitution and a half-hour documentary film (Braden). Drafts of the research and impact papers were used by the Texas Constitutional Revision Commission and the Constitutional Convention of 1974. The Sixty-third Legislature formed the Texas Constitutional Revision Commission which served as the basis for the proposed Constitution in 1974 and 1975 (Newell et al 57-58). The Sixty-third Legislatures proposed draft failed to reach voters when two issue were introduced - Pari-mutuel betting and right to work (Newell et al 58). The Sixth-fourth Legislature keep the original Bill of Rights and proposed eight constitutional amendments that contained a new constitution; all eight amendments were rejected at the polls in November 1975

Constitutional reform ultimately failed because neither Legislators nor citizens took an interest (Newell et al 59-60). Additionally, there was much bickering dividing members on key issues such as: strengthening the Executive Branch, requiring Justices of the Peace of have a completed law degree and keeping Texas as a right to work state. These issues, combined with citizens’ concerns on education, health care, highways, air quality (Newell et al 60) and the fact that most Texas are politically conservative, preferring the current constitution which they understand and over a new constitution which may prove worse than the current one (Newell et al 60) proved difficult to meet the two-thirds Legislative vote and public