Proposing a constitutional amendment to repeal the constitutional order of business that restricts the matters the legislature may consider during different stages of a regular legislative session.
Impact
The proposed repeal of these legislative restrictions is significant as it would alter the operational guidelines governing how Texas lawmakers handle various issues throughout the legislative session. Critics of the existing structure argue that it limits the legislature's ability to react to urgent or emerging matters effectively. Conversely, proponents may contend that removing these stipulations could lead to a more chaotic legislative process, where too many issues are addressed at once, potentially diluting scrutiny and oversight.
Summary
HJR60 proposes a constitutional amendment aimed at repealing the provisions in Sections 5(b) and (c) of Article III of the Texas Constitution, which restrict the matters the legislature may consider during different stages of a regular legislative session. By eliminating these restrictions, the bill intends to provide the legislature with greater flexibility to address a wider range of issues without being bound by the current procedural limitations. This amendment, if passed, would alter the framework under which legislative business is conducted in Texas, potentially leading to more responsive governance.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding HJR60 seems to be mixed among legislators and stakeholders. Supporters appreciate the increased flexibility it offers and perceive it as a progressive step towards more dynamic lawmaking. However, opponents might express concerns regarding the potential for instability and the prioritization of issues that might overlook more pressing local or state needs. Overall, the discussions around this bill reflect a tension between the desire for legislative efficiency and the need for orderly governance.
Contention
One notable point of contention is the balance between ensuring legislative agility and maintaining structured, thorough debate on proposed bills. Some legislators may worry that without the current restrictions, there could be an influx of arbitrary proposals that may not receive the necessary scrutiny before being voted upon. This divergence in opinion represents broader philosophical debates regarding the efficiency and effectiveness of legislative processes.
Proposing a constitutional amendment authorizing legislative action at any time during a regular session of the legislature on a bill that extends the existence of an agency, commission, or advisory committee following legislative review.