Proposing a constitutional amendment limiting to two the number of consecutive terms for which a person may be elected or appointed to hold certain state offices.
Impact
If adopted, HJR13 would solidify the commitment of the state to maintain a robust Medicaid program, potentially altering the normal budgetary processes that could impact healthcare services. Advocates argue that this measure would prevent delays in the availability of services while providing peace of mind to recipients who depend on Medicaid for critical healthcare. The bill aims to establish a statewide framework that prioritizes healthcare funding, promoting a stronger safety net for residents facing health challenges.
Summary
HJR13 is a legislative resolution proposing a significant amendment to state healthcare funding, particularly focusing on Medicaid. The bill seeks to ensure that state funding for Medicaid programs remains protected and is not subject to arbitrary cuts during budget reviews. This structural change is intended to enhance the stability of healthcare funding within the state and ensure that vulnerable populations continue to receive necessary medical services without interruption. The proposal draws on the need for consistent funding amidst challenges posed by economic fluctuations and varying political priorities over time.
Sentiment
The general sentiment around HJR13 exhibits a sense of urgency among healthcare advocates and supporters, emphasizing the necessity for safeguarding Medicaid funding. Health organizations, patient advocacy groups, and many legislators express strong support, citing the resolution as a critical step toward ensuring enduring healthcare access. However, oppositional voices raise concerns about the potential implications for state financial flexibility, fearing that safeguarding Medicaid funding could lead to limitations on budgetary allocations for other vital services.
Contention
Debate surrounding HJR13 centers on the balance between healthcare funding stability and the state's ability to manage its finances effectively. Proponents argue that the resolution is essential for protecting vulnerable populations, while critics suggest that it could limit future legislative actions and fiscal strategies concerning broader budgetary priorities. The discussion indicates a fundamental disagreement about the government's role in healthcare funding and the long-term sustainability of these services given economic constraints.
Proposing a constitutional amendment to limit the time that a person may serve as a member of the Texas Legislature or as a statewide elected officer in the executive branch to 12 consecutive years.
Proposing a constitutional amendment to limit the time that a person may serve as a member of the Texas Legislature or as a statewide elected officer in the executive branch.
Proposing a constitutional amendment requiring the secretary of state to be elected by the qualified voters at a general election instead of appointed by the governor.
Proposing a constitutional amendment requiring elections on proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution to be held in November of even-numbered years.
Proposing a constitutional amendment establishing an independent redistricting commission to establish districts for the election of the members of the United States House of Representatives elected from this state, the Texas Senate, and the Texas House of Representatives.
Proposing a constitutional amendment establishing an independent redistricting commission to establish districts for the election of the members of the United States House of Representatives elected from this state, the Texas Senate, and the Texas House of Representatives.
Proposing a constitutional amendment providing for the suspension of certain public officers by the governor and the trial, removal, and reinstatement of certain public officers by the senate.