Texas Government

Answer the following questions (200 word minimum per question)
Should the state of Texas have an income tax?  Why or why not?

Should the Texas legislator keep the committee system?  Some things to consider could be: does it give too much power to the chamber leadership, does it give too much power to the committee chairs, does it make it too easy for a bill to die?


Should the death penalty be abolished?

In Texas we elect judges.  There is some fear this leads to a biased ruling based on the fact many attorneys and corporations will donate to a campaign for a particular judge and then will often do business (have cases) in front of the judge they donated to.  There is a feeling this can cause a conflict of interest on the part of the judge.  Should we continue to allow judges to be elected?  Some of the factors to consider could be if we do not allow them to be elected, how do we select them?  If we continue with the election path, should we implement some sort of campaign reform?

In Texas we elect judges.  There is some fear this leads to a biased ruling based on the fact many attorneys and corporations will donate to a campaign for a particular judge and then will often do business (have cases) in front of the judge they donated to.  There is a feeling this can cause a conflict of interest on the part of the judge.  Should we continue to allow judges to be elected?  Some of the factors to consider could be if we do not allow them to be elected, how do we select them?  If we continue with the election path, should we implement some sort of campaign reform?

During the course of the lecture we discussed if the government would save money or be more effective if we privatized government agencies (bureaucracies).  Should we privatize?








Question One

Texas is among the states that advocates for no income taxation. It joins other states that have recently become of the same. Most economists and professionals who support such move argue that with the no income tax move, the state will lure more growth opportunities and thus development. They also argue that there will be a better chance to create jobs as well as making the job environment within the
state favorable. The move will then enhance the retention of the young and vibrant workforce that is educated and productive from crossing into other states. To better give a stand on Texas’ situation it would be better to first understand what income tax is and its importance. 

Income tax refers to the levy that is imposed on individuals or corporations. In the case of Texas, only personal income tax is not levied. Income taxes are healthy to a state’s economy and so does their absence as will be seen shortly. However, looked from another angle as the proponents, it is evident that the abolition of income tax will be beneficial to the economy of Texas. There will be more room for people or rather professionals from other states to come into Texas seeking job opportunities. While doing this the money earned can be used in the development of the state, through the taxes that are levied on goods (sales taxes) that everyone must use. This will further promote local development through the local taxes as well. Texas will also continue to benefit from its property taxes that are sustainable and effective. Overall, Texas will draw more businesses and thus create jobs. Through the job creation more talented workers will get into Texas and thus economic development in the manner illustrated above

Question Two

The committee system is generally used in the USA, Texas inclusive. The committee shapes as well as acts as gatekeepers to the actions of the legislature as well as the legislations that are proposed. It is to some extent agreeable that the committee has the power to make a bill to die through pigeon holing it, but the fact remains that this is done after an in-depth scrutiny. There are various considerations including the cost of implementing among others. The committee does not give too much power on the chamber leadership as its decision is autonomous and only after a legislation passes through it does it become tabled in the chambers of congress before being passed for presidential ascent. 

One thing is notable here the president ascents the bill into law only after the committee and the chambers have reconciled any differences that there may be between them. In this way, the Texas should continue with the committee system since it ensures that power is evenly distributed. In reference to making a bill die easily, the committee will be useful in making sure that much time is not wasted on bills that are likely to affect the interest groups. In the process of reviewing the legislation the committee opens room for interested individuals and organizations so as to make meaningful recommendations. This makes the implementation of the legislation fair to either sides.

Question Three

There are many debates pertaining the abolition or retention of death penalty. From a personal perspective and the results of these debates, death penalty should be abolished. First off, death penalties involve executions that are at the expense of tax payers’ money. The second reason is because there is no tangible evidence that such capital punishments have any impacts on prevention of the crimes that they are sentenced for. Death penalties also put the lives of innocent people who are wrongfully convicted in jeopardy as they are wrongfully executed at the same time. The wrongful execution is an incorrigible form of injustice that no price can pay or account for. In cases of bias, one race risks being executed based on bias rather than what the law considers a capital offence. This would also mean that when the defense is poor as is the case in most murder cases, most people end up being sentenced. The death penalty is also not representative as it is applied randomly, creating room for bias of some form. There are also instances where wrong and shoddy investigations end up making the mentally ill to be executed.

The capital punishment is against the belief of most religions and is morally wrong in an ideal society. In some way, capital punishment would go against the human rights; the right to live. The politicians, legal counsel and the jurisdiction charged with offering such services would be biased and have a hand in such executions making it an easy way for revenging. With considerations of all these arguments, death penalty should be abolished and a better way for capital punishment be adopted.

Question Four

Competition has for a long time been seen as a good move especially for public officials. However, when referring to the judges there are some drawbacks that can be associated with the whole election process including the campaign. First off, elected judges often base their sentencing on their political ideologies based on the voters in their districts. In this case, a judge will be partial when making a harsh sentence to suit one group over the other ad justice would not have taken its course. Of course, when elected in such a judicial position, a judge is more subject to the electorate rather than the rule of law. For instance, a corporation or a group of elite may back up a judge in the campaign period so that when they are in the position they pay back in form of favors in cases that involve the ‘sponsors’. Consequent to this there might arise conflicts of interest and have partiality in his or her decision.

The best alternative to electing judges as is in Texas is to appoint the judges. In this case, the governors who are representatives of the public make appointments on the judges. In this case, the governors have the upper hand in evaluating political preferences and the sentencing criteria or approach by a given judge other than the local preference when they are elected. Most often, the voter preferences in the state may have some relative similarity making appointment the best alternative against election. Another advantage of appointing the judges is that a best candidate who receives public critique is given a fair chance for a position and might serve especially when qualification is a matter of concern. The appointment of judges will consider their qualifications, their sentencing approaches and any connection they have with the political leaders to determine if whether or not they can be influenced in making any sentences.

Lastly, appointment is cognizant of the qualifications of a candidate thus improving the judicial system. This would be the best move for Texas. However, as it is the voter preferences might vary making the election system the best way. Therefore, Texas should have reforms on the campaigns to avoid political interference. First off, the funding should be controlled and one must be made to declare their interests with reference to specific groups prior to holding an elective position. In a nutshell, there should be some form of vetting for the judges to make sure that the elected judge holds the value of the position rather than the interest of the groups contributing to their election.

Question Five

Despite the criticisms that are leveled on privatization of government agencies and thus services, it is the best way to go. The government should privatize its operations to be able to enjoy the advantages of privatization. The first advantage our government will realize is saving of money. From an economic perspective the private sectors will take place of the ineffective and loss oriented government enterprises. In this way the effective use of resources will be ensured. The new owners will have an opportunity of turning the ineffective public enterprises into successful businesses that are profitable to the government. The privatized enterprises are allowed access to investment capital that the government is incapable of providing. Through access to funds, such enterprises are able to be effective in all its operations.

Generally, all the government agencies will be able to reduce costs of operations. The monopoly by the government and inability to provide services to the citizens will be removed. Consequently, service delivery within the agencies will be able to be efficient. Generally, when the agencies are privatized they are able to attract investors who would fund some of the projects. The major reason for attracting investors will be lack of political interference and the possibility of future success of the bureaucracies. The government agencies that are privatized are able to compete favorably through the efficient service delivery and competence of the managements. 

The other reason why we should privatize apart from cost savings is that we will improve risk management. The spreading of risk will be through shifting major liabilities of the government to the private owners. The other reason as had earlier on been seen is that there will be quality improvement in business service delivery. There will also be timely delivery of services so as to remain the best in the market. It also enhances the ability of the government to access expertise that is required by the public. Lastly, the competition that will result from the privatized enterprises will make them more innovative based and change oriented compared to the monopolistic government agencies. Considering the above merits of privatization, our government should consider privatizing so that there is optimization of their operations both economically and developmentwise.