A "yes" vote supported adding an amendment to prohibit the state from levying an income tax on individuals to the Texas Constitution, which requires a two-thirds legislative vote and a statewide referendum to amend.
A "no" vote opposed this amendment, thus continuing to allow the state to enact a tax on individuals in the future through a simple majority legislative vote and a statewide referendum.
What did Proposition 4 change about enacting an income tax in Texas?[edit]
Before Proposition 4, the Texas State Constitution required the state legislature to put legislation enacting an income tax before voters as a statewide referendum, which voters could approve or reject. Placing a referendum before voters required a simple majority vote (50%+1) in each legislative chamber.[1]
Proposition 4 replaced the referendum requirement with a ban on enacting an income tax on individuals. Since Proposition 4's ban on an income tax added a provision of the Texas Constitution, a two-thirds vote in each legislative chamber and a statewide referendum are needed to repeal or amend the ban.
Therefore, one of the practical effects of Proposition 4 was to increase the legislative vote requirement to authorize an income tax.[2]
Proposition 4 repealed the existing requirement that an income tax, should one be enacted, be used to reduce school ad valorem (property) taxes and increase education funding.[2]
The ballot measure also replaced the phrase "tax on the net incomes of natural persons" with the phrase "tax on the net incomes of individuals."[2] There was disagreement between some supporters and opponents of the measure regarding the relevance and meaning of the change from natural persons to individuals.[3] On May 15, 2019, the Legislative Budget Board wrote that because Proposition 4 did not define individuals, the language could be interpreted to include businesses that are subject to the state's franchise tax.[4] On May 27, 2019, the legislature passed a bill, which the governor signed, that defined individuals as a natural person and excluded partnerships, corporations, banks, and other legal entities.[5]
As of 2019, Texas was one of seven states without a personal income tax. Texas had never levied a tax on personal income. The other 43 states collected an income tax in addition to the federal income tax. As of 2019, the most recent state to enact a personal income tax was New Jersey in 1976. The federal government enacted a federal tax on personal income in 1913.[6]
The Texas State Legislature placed Proposition 4 on the ballot in one of the narrowest votes between 1995 and 2019. In Texas, a two-thirds vote is required to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot, which is equal to 100 votes in the state House and 21 votes in the state Senate, assuming no vacancies. The constitutional amendment received 100 in the state House and 22 votes in the state Senate, tying with Proposition 1 (2005), Proposition 2 (2005), and Proposition 12 (2003) for having the narrowest margin of approval in the legislature between 1995 and 2019. Most legislative Democrats (65 percent) opposed Proposition 4. Legislative Republicans, along with 29 percent of legislative Democrats, supported the constitutional amendment.
The constitutional amendment prohibiting the imposition of an individual income tax, including a tax on an individual’s share of partnership and unincorporated association income.[7]
The ballot measure amended Section 1(c) of Article 8, repealed Section 24 of Article 8, and added Section 24-a of Article 8 of the Texas Constitution. The following underlined text was added and struck-through text was deleted:[2]
Note: Use your mouse to scroll over the below text to see the full text.
Section 1. (c) The Legislature may provide for the taxation of intangible property and may also impose occupation taxes, both upon natural persons and upon corporations, other than municipal, doing any business in this State. The LegislatureSubject to the restrictions of Section 24 of this article, it may also tax incomes of both natural persons and corporations other than municipal. Persons engaged in mechanical and agricultural pursuits shall never be required to pay an occupation tax.
Section 24-a. The legislature may not impose a tax on the net incomes of individuals, including an individual’s share of partnership and unincorporated association income.
Section 24. (a) A general law enacted by the legislature that imposes a tax on the net incomes of natural persons, including a person's share of partnership and unincorporated association income, must provide that the portion of the law imposing the tax not take effect until approved by a majority of the registered voters voting in a statewide referendum held on the question of imposing the tax. The referendum must specify the rate of the tax that will apply to taxable income as defined by law.
(b) A general law enacted by the legislature that increases the rate of the tax, or changes the tax, in a manner that results in an increase in the combined income tax liability of all persons subject to the tax may not take effect until approved by a majority of the registered voters voting in a statewide referendum held on the question of increasing the income tax. A determination of whether a bill proposing a change in the tax would increase the combined income tax liability of all persons subject to the tax must be made by comparing the provisions of the proposed change in law with the provisions of the law for the most recent year in which actual tax collections have been made. A referendum held under this subsection must specify the manner in which the proposed law would increase the combined income tax liability of all persons subject to the tax.
(c) Except as provided by Subsection (b) of this section, the legislature may amend or repeal a tax approved by the voters under this section without submitting the amendment or the repeal to the voters as provided by Subsection (a) of this section.
(d) If the legislature repeals a tax approved by the voters under this section, the legislature may reenact the tax without submitting the reenactment to the voters as provided by Subsection (a) of this section only if the effective date of the reenactment of the tax is before the first anniversary of the effective date of the repeal.
(e) The legislature may provide for the taxation of income in a manner which is consistent with federal law.
(f) In the first year in which a tax described by Subsection (a) is imposed and during the first year of any increase in the tax that is subject to Subsection (b) of this section, not less than two-thirds of all net revenues remaining after payment of all refunds allowed by law and expenses of collection from the tax shall be used to reduce the rate of ad valorem maintenance and operation taxes levied for the support of primary and secondary public education. In subsequent years, not less than two-thirds of all net revenues from the tax shall be used to continue such ad valorem tax relief.
(g) The net revenues remaining after the dedication of money from the tax under Subsection (f) of this section shall be used for support of education, subject to legislative appropriation, allocation, and direction.
(h) The maximum rate at which a school district may impose ad valorem maintenance and operation taxes is reduced by an amount equal to one cent per $100 valuation for each one cent per $100 valuation that the school district's ad valorem maintenance and operation tax is reduced by the minimum amount of money dedicated under Subsection (f) of this section, provided that a school district may subsequently increase the maximum ad valorem maintenance and operation tax rate if the increased maximum rate is approved by a majority of the voters of the school district voting at an election called and held for that purpose. The legislature by general law shall provide for the tax relief that is required by Subsection (f) and this subsection.
(i) Subsections (f) and (h) of this section apply to ad valorem maintenance and operation taxes levied by a school district on or after the first January 1 after the date on which a tax on the net incomes of natural persons, including a person's share of partnership and unincorporated association income, begins to apply to that income, except that if the income tax begins to apply on a January 1, Subsections (f) and (h) of this section apply to ad valorem maintenance and operation taxes levied on or after that date.
(j) A provision of this section prevails over a conflicting provision of Article VII, Section 3, of this Constitution to the extent of the conflict.[7]
Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The Texas State Legislature wrote the ballot language for this measure.
The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 22, and the FRE is -22. The word count for the ballot title is 24, and the estimated reading time is 6 seconds.
In 2017, the average grade level for ballot measure titles in Texas was 25.
Rep. Jeff Leach (R-67), who co-authored Proposition 4, said, "Really this is a statement to the people of Texas and the rest of the nation that we are open for business. ... One of the reasons our economy is so strong is because we trust the people, and that's what this proposition is all about."[14]
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) stated, "Texas creates more jobs than all other states combined and our economy is one of the strongest in the world because we keep taxes low. ... Prop. 4 will allow you to vote to make it almost impossible to ever create an individual income tax in Texas. This will keep our state’s economy strong and ensure you get to keep more of the money you make. Say no to an income tax."[11]
Dick Lavine, a senior fiscal analyst for the Center for Public Policy Priorities, said, "Voters therefore already have total control over the adoption of an income tax. This proposed amendment would only place unnecessary hurdles for future generations to overcome in order to make their own choices about how to support public services like education, health care, and transportation."[15]
Noel Candelaria, president of the Texas State Teachers Association, stated, "Proposition 4 is bad for public education. It purports to ban a personal income tax in Texas. It doesn’t. But if adopted, it would remove from the state constitution a guarantee that any revenue raised by an income tax be dedicated to improving education funding. ... Proposition 4 will not prohibit a future Legislature from approving an income tax on a two-thirds vote and spending the revenue however lawmakers wish. They could even use the new revenue to pay for tax breaks for wealthy corporations, while ignoring the needs of public schools."[17]
Texans for Prop 4 registered in support of the ballot measure. The political action committee (PAC) reported $3,460 in contributions and $3,460 in expenditures. There was no committee registered to oppose the ballot measure.[9]
Fort Worth Star-Telegram: “This amendment would boost the needed vote in each house of the Legislature to two-thirds. The bar to a major new tax should be high.”[19]
Austin American-Statesman: “NO to a measure that would make it even harder to impose a state income tax, something that is already very unlikely. This measure’s flawed wording could allow courts to kill the business franchise tax, which raises billions of dollars for public education and other programs.”[20]
The Austin Chronicle: “This would prohibit the state from imposing an individual income tax, which it of course has never done, and which has been a third-rail issue for generations, and which would already require statewide voter approval thanks to previous GOP tub-thumping on this issue, despite it being a more efficient and equitable way to fund public services. This is pure base-scratching bullshit to "send a message," by its supporters' own admission.”[21]
Corpus Christi Caller-Times: “At best, this is an unnecessary feel-good measure whose main purpose is for its sponsors to be able to take political credit for it. At worst, it's a yoke on future generations of Texans whose challenges maybe different and better-served by an income tax. We Texans pay a huge price in property tax to be able to say we don't have an income tax.”[22]
The Dallas Morning News: “This newspaper opposes a state income tax. Its absence is one of the big reasons people move here and companies do business here. The state constitution already requires the approval of a majority of lawmakers and then a majority of voters to change that. But Proposition 4 would unnecessarily require a supermajority (two-thirds). There’s no need to clutter the constitution with unnecessary amendments like this.”[23]
The Eagle: “The same stiff requirements to enact an income tax that have been in place since 1993 will remain in force. But, if Texas and Texans ever decide in the future to overhaul our antiquated tax system and put in an income tax, we shouldn’t make it harder to do so.”[24]
Houston Chronicle: “In the end, though, it’s unclear why a change is needed. What’s more, some argue Prop 4’s wording of “individual income tax” is vague enough to draw a court challenge that could extend the ban to businesses, which could cost the state billions in revenue. Why take that risk? We say vote “Against” and leave dead enough alone.”[25]
Longview News-Journal: “We oppose a state income tax but Texas already has an amendment prohibiting the Legislature from imposing one without a statewide referendum. This proposition has the feel of showboating with no practical purpose. Beyond that, we have no way of knowing how future Texans might want to fund government.”[26]
San Antonio Express-News: "It’s unnecessary and ties the hands of future Texans."[27]
Waco Tribune-Herald: “This is political pandering of the worst sort, given it’s already nearly impossible to create a state income tax without voter approval. Plus, given legislative discussions about eliminating the much-hated property tax on daily school operations, approving this amendment could have the unintended consequence of eliminating viable options. Think twice, fellow taxpayer!”[28]
In 1993, 69 percent of electors voted to approve Proposition 4, which prohibited the state from levying a tax on personal income without voter approval. Under Proposition 4, the state legislature could refer a voter referendum for an income tax through a simple majority vote in each legislative chamber. The ballot measure also required that revenue from an income tax be dedicated to education and limiting local school tax rates.
As of 2019, Texas was one of seven states without a personal income tax. Texas had never levied a tax on personal income. Along with Texas, Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Washington, and Wyoming did not have personal income taxes. The other 43 states collected an income tax in addition to the federal income tax.[6]
The first state to enact a personal income tax was Wisconsin in 1911. Hawaii enacted an income tax in 1901, which was before Wisconsin, but Hawaii was not a state until 1959. The most recent state, as of 2019, to enact a personal income tax was New Jersey in 1976. The federal government enacted a federal tax on personal income in 1913.[6]
In 2019, 216 constitutional amendments had been filed in the Texas State Legislature. Legislators were permitted to file constitutional amendments through March 8, 2019, unless permission was given to introduce an amendment after the deadline. Between 2009 and 2017, an average of 187 constitutional amendments were filed during regular legislative sessions. The state legislature approved an average of nine constitutional amendments during regular legislative sessions. Therefore, the average rate of certification during regular legislative sessions was 4.7 percent. In 2019, 10 of the 216 proposed constitutional amendments were certified for the ballot, meaning the rate of certification was 4.6 percent.
In Texas, a two-thirds vote is needed in each chamber of the Texas State Legislature to refer a constitutional amendment to the ballot for voter consideration.
The constitutional amendment was introduced into the state legislature as House Joint Resolution 13 (HJR 13) on December 18, 2018. On May 9, 2019, the Texas House of Representatives approved HJR 13, with 100 members supporting the amendment, 42 members opposing the amendment, and eight members not voting. At least 100 votes were needed to pass HJR 13.[12]
On May 20, 2019, the Texas State Senate approved HJR 13, with 22 senators supporting the amendment and nine senators opposing the amendment. At least 21 votes were needed to pass HJR 13. Republicans, along with three Democrats, supported the amendment. The nine senators to vote against the amendment were Democrats.[12]
House Joint Resolution 13 (HJR 13) passed the legislature with 122 votes—22 in the Senate and 100 in the House. HJR 13 tied with Proposition 1 (2005), Proposition 2, and Proposition 12 (2003) for having the narrowest margin of approval in the legislature between 1995 and 2019. In the state Senate, three constitutional amendments passed with a narrower vote than HJR 13—Proposition 1 (2005), Proposition 2 (2005), and Proposition 13 (1997)—each of which received 21 votes. In the state House, HJR 13 had the narrowest vote since at least 1995. The next most narrow votes were on Proposition 1 (2005) and Proposition 2 (2005), which each received 101 votes.
In Texas, the average number of legislative votes for a constitutional amendment was 164 between 1995 and 2019, whereas the average number of legislative votes against a constitutional amendment was six.
The following table illustrates the five constitutional amendments with the narrowest margin of approval in the legislature between 1995 and 2019 in Texas.
Requirement: In Texas, a constitutional requirement requires a two-thirds vote of each legislative chamber, which equals a minimum of 121 votes—21 in the Senate and 100 in the House.
In Texas, all polling places are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Central Time. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote. Texas is divided between Central and Mountain time zones.[29]
To register to vote in Texas, an applicant must be a United States citizen, a resident of the county in which he or she is registering, and at least 17 years and 10 months old.[30]
The deadline to register to vote is 30 days before the election. Prospective voters can request a postage-paid voter registration form online or complete the form online and return it to the county voter registrar. Applications are also available at a variety of locations including the county voter registrar’s office, the secretary of state’s office, libraries, and high schools. Voter registration certificates are mailed to newly registered voters.[31]
Texas does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. Section 18.068 of the Texas Election Code says the following:
“
The secretary of state shall quarterly compare the information received under Section 16.001 of this code and Section 62.113, Government Code, to the statewide computerized
voter registration list. If the secretary determines that a voter on the registration list is deceased or has been excused or disqualified from jury service because the voter is not a citizen, the secretary shall send notice of the determination to the voter registrar of the counties considered appropriate by the secretary.[7]
In January 2019, the Texas secretary of state’s office announced that it would be providing local election officials with a list of registered voters who obtained driver’s licenses or IDs with documentation such as work visas or green cards. Counties would then be able to require voters on the list to provide proof of citizenship within 30 days.[35] The review was halted by a federal judge in February 2019, and Secretary of State David Whitley rescinded the advisory in April.[36][37] A news release from Whitley’s office stated that “... going forward, the Texas Secretary of State's office will send to county voter registrars only the matching records of individuals who registered to vote before identifying themselves as non-U.S. citizens to DPS when applying for a driver's license or personal identification card. This will ensure that naturalized U.S. citizens who lawfully registered to vote are not impacted by this voter registration list maintenance process.”[38]
United States Military Identification Card containing the person’s photograph
United States Citizenship Certificate containing the person’s photograph
United States passport (book or card)
Identification provided by voters aged 18-69 may be expired for no more than four years before the election date. Voters aged 70 and older can use an expired ID card regardless of how long ago the ID expired.[39]
Voters who are unable to provide one of the ID options listed above can sign a Reasonable Impediment Declaration and provide one of the following supporting documents:[39]
Copy or original of a government document that shows the voter’s name and an address, including the voter’s voter registration certificate
Copy of or original current utility bill
Copy of or original bank statement
Copy of or original government check
Copy of or original paycheck
Copy of or original of (a) a certified domestic (from a U.S. state or territory) birth certificate or (b) a document confirming birth admissible in a court of law which establishes the voter’s identity (which may include a foreign birth document)
The following voters are exempt from showing photo ID:[39]
Voters with a disability
Voters with a disability "may apply with the county voter registrar for a permanent exemption to presenting an acceptable photo identification or following the Reasonable Impediment Declaration procedure in the county."
Voters who have a religious objection to being photographed
↑ 7.07.17.2Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different contentCite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content