Due to popular demand, below is the position of the “Crack Mullet Research Team” on each of the Constitutional Amendments on Saturday’s ballot. Regardless of whether one agrees or not, please inform yourself and then go vote on Saturday.

C.B.

No. 1 (For) Coastal Protection and Restoration Fund: This will change the name of the fund and dedicate all potential federal revenues from Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities to coastal restoration and hurricane protection.

No. 2 (For) Consolidation of Coastal Funds: The state has two funds of this type, the one in Amendment No. 1 and the Louisiana Coastal Restoration Fund. The LCRF currently has no funds. It would receive monies from any future sale of the remaining 40% of the tobacco settlement. This would combine the two funds into one.

No. 3 (For) Regional Flood Protection Authorities: This is the “levee board consolidation” amendment which eliminates the Orleans Parish Levee Board and streamlines and reduces the number of levee boards in southeast Louisiana.

No. 4 (Against) Hurricane Protection Liability: This amendment favors government and allows it to pay private landowners less.

No. 5 (Against) Limits on Expropriation of Private Property: This could be the Trojan horse, similar to the “gambling” and “gaming” situation which would allow your property to be taken for non-governmental purposes.

No. 6 (Against) Procedures to Transfer Expropriated Property: There is the possibility of over-expropriating land, making improvements and then, after declaring it excess, offering it back to the original landowner (who may not have wanted to sell) at a much higher price.

No. 7 (For) Medicaid Trust Fund Investment: This would authorize the state to invest up to 35% of the Medicaid Trust Fund for the Elderly in stocks. Historically, stocks have outperformed other investments over a long period of time.

No. 8 (For) Homestead Exemption and Special Assessments for Damaged Homes: To have a homestead exemption, one must occupy the home. After hurricanes Katrina and Rita, that has been impossible for some–and it will still take a long time to rebuild.

No. 9 (Against) State Mandates on School Spending: There was a drafting error that complicates the amendment and may contradict its intended purpose. Tell the leges, get it right before you submit something to us.

No. 10 (For) Higher Education Investments: This is similar to the issue discussed in No. 7, authorizing investment of up to 35% of endowed university funds in stocks.

No. 11 (Against) Expands the Homestead Exemption to Homes in Revocable Trusts. Any time we expand the application of the Homestead Exemption, we force taxes up on the rest of us.

No. 12 (For) Vacancy in Statewide Elected Offices: This would make filling vacancies uniform for statewide elected offices. Currently, if there is a vacancy in the office of lieutenant governor, the governor appoints a new officeholder and he or she fills out the remainder of the term. This measure would require that an election be called if there were more than one year left in the term. For other statewide offices, an election is required at the next regularly scheduled congressional or statewide election–but there is one year out of every four where there is no such election, which would extend the term. This amendment would require an election be called in that specific year.

No. 13 (For) Judges’ Qualifications: This amendment would increase minimum qualifications for specific judges. The Supreme Court and Court of Appeals would require 10 years in the practice of law. Others judgeships would require 8 years. The current law is 5 years. City and municipal courts or justices of the peace are not affected. The new requirements would take effect in 2008.