Why does the Texas legislature only meet every other year?

They do less damage that way. Seriously. After blowing untold millions in the regular legislative session, then squandering many millions more in a series of special sessions and failing to come up with a school finance plan, which was the first, last and only item on the agenda, the politicos in Austin have decided to waste even more money by including a constitutional ban on gay marriage in the current constitutional amendment election. Never mind that there's already a state law on the books doing just that.

Remember: Nothing obscures gross incompetence as does pandering to the fundamentalist base.

Of course, an amendment to the Texas constitution isn't anything to write home about. The original document was adopted in 1876 after Reconstruction, and designed first and foremost to strip any and all power away from the government at pretty much every level. Seriously. A constable in Zavala County can't legally blow his nose in public without a constitutional referendum. Don't believe me? Since 1876 615 amendments have been proposed (including the nine currently before voters) and 432 have been adopted by voters. It is the definition of a bad, unworkable document. You'd think that would be a subtle sign that the state should write a new constitution. But then that would make sense, something that rarely happens in Austin.

But back to the gay marriage ban. I'm hoping that whoever wrote the actual amendment is more competent with the written word than the person who wrote the ballot language:

"The constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage."

Note the key phrase at the end: prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage. Identical or similar to marriage is marriage. So if our political nincompoops use the same language in the amendment, what they are advocating, technically, is a ban of all marriage.

Me: "What're you guys doing here?"

Politicos: "Bannin' marriage 'tween queers! And everyone else. You know, just to be on the safe side. Them queers can be tricksy!"

Me: "Well, good for you!"

Now Playing: The Police Message in a Box