(The Center Square) — Louisiana voters face critical decisions on four constitutional amendments in Saturday’s election, tackling issues ranging from judicial accountability to budget procedures and property tax reforms.
The Public Affairs Research council has provided a review of each amendment, detailing their purpose, the current status-quo and the arguments for and against.
Amendment 1 proposes expanding the Judiciary Commission from nine to 14 members, adding appointees from the governor, House speaker, and Senate president, and granting the Louisiana Supreme Court authority to initiate investigations and disqualify judges without commission recommendations.
Supporters argue this would improve oversight and reduce bias by including non-lawyers, while opponents warn of potential political influence and due process concerns.
“The concern this is trying to address is the fox guarding the hen house issue,” Daniel Erspamer, CEO of the Pelican Institute, said.
Council For A Better Louisiana on the other hand is opposed to the amendment.
“I’m not sure how this particular amendment address the issue of transparency,” Berry Erwin, President and CEO of Council For A Better Louisiana, said. “I’m also not sure how it speeds up the process, because they get 300 or so complaints a year, with five people working on it.”
“What we really need is a mechanism for the public to better judge these judges,” Jan Moller, CEO of Invest in Louisiana, said.
Amendments 2 and 3 focus on improving budget transparency and efficiency.
Amendment 2 mandates a 48-hour waiting period before final votes on budget bills, eliminating lawmakers’ ability to waive this delay. Proponents say it ensures time to review complex appropriations, while critics argue it could delay urgent decisions.
“It’s the old ‘we got to pass it to see what’s in it’ mindset, and that happens far too often,” Erspamer said in support of the bill. “If we’re going to advocate that legislators have more authority and flexibility in allocating taxpayer dollars…we need to make sure it has trust from colleagues and voters,” adding that it removes this ability “to play games” and give the Legislature more time to deliberate.
Amendment 3 complements this by allowing legislative sessions to extend by up to six days, with a two-thirds vote, to finalize budget bills. Supporters view this as a cost-effective alternative to special sessions, but opponents believe the current schedule suffices if lawmakers prioritize their work.
Amendment 4 would overhaul Louisiana’s system for handling delinquent property taxes, replacing the current tax sale process with a tax lien auction system.
This change would allow local governments to sell tax liens to recover unpaid taxes, with property owners retaining more time to address debts before foreclosure. Proponents argue the reform modernizes the system and better protects taxpayer rights, while critics warn of potential investor deterrence and legal challenges.
“The courts have said there could be a problem with [the current system], because if you’re actually buying a piece of somebody’s property, you’ve got to make sure there is proper notice… to everybody that’s an owner,” Erwin explained.
The current process, unique to Louisiana, involves investors buying portions of properties rather than tax liens, which has caused legal and administrative challenges, especially for properties with multiple owners or unclear titles.
“What the constitutional amendment does is take most of the language [about tax sales] out of the Constitution, and then it says the legislature will determine how to do tax sales, but it has to be through this lien process,” Erwin said.
Each amendment addresses significant governance challenges, offering voters the chance to shape Louisiana’s future approach to judicial accountability, fiscal transparency, and property tax collection.