Constitutions define principles guarding a society or suggest a political goal that a society envisions to achieve. Constitutions are more than a platform where structure; authority and responsibility of government institutions are defined (Krasner 87). They also portray essential political, economic and power relations by the culture, values and interest of the group that created it. Also, the events of the period in which the document was written contributed enormously to its content. Definition of the relationship between those in government and the citizens is also available in the Constitution and the limit of their practices clearly defined. This paper will compare the structure of two sovereign states that is Mississippi and Texas states and handle the similarities and differences of the two constitutions.
The similarity between the two laws lies in the power of government. Both constitutions support division of powers into three bodies that are the legislature, judiciary and executive branch of government. Mississippi Constitution states that Mississippi government has three separate branches each of them treated as a separate entity; those in the judiciary as one, those in the legislature as another and finally the executive branch. The Constitution explicitly states that no particular branch will interfere with the activity of the other two branches as these departments are of a separate mandate as declared in the constitution.
Similarly article 2 sections one of the Texas Constitution indicate that division of powers will base itself on three different departments whose terms will be different from other agencies. It instructs the creation of three departments the legislature, the judiciary and the executive branches of government. Any of these bodies cannot interfere with the decisions of the other two bodies unless provided by the constitution. Article 3 section one of the Texas Constitution further specifies the persons given the mandate to carry out legislative function these are the senate and house of representative .subsection two comprises of each institution members with Senate consisting of 31members while the house of representatives has 150 members. These members have a responsibility of creating and amending laws that govern Texas states.
Article 4 and 5 section one shows the constituents of executive and judiciary departments respectively. The executive office will entail the Governor, who will be the chief executive officer of the state, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, controller of public account, commissioner of general land and the attorney general. Supreme Court, the court of appeal, the district court and any court created by law will constitute the judiciary. These structures show close similarity with the Mississippi Constitution and the mandates provide to each of the departments are also similar.
The principal difference between Texas and Mississippi constitution results from the amendment process. Texas Constitution is on the list of longest state constitutions in the United States and has undergone very many amendments since its adoption in 1876 (Bruff 1337).It has a record 666 proposed constitutional amendments of which 483 have been approved by the electorate and 179 rejected the remaining four did not reach the final steps of voters' approval. The Texas constitution amendment is easy to achieve as it involves a simple majority win. One of the requirements for a constitutional amendment in Texas is that the bill gets a two-thirds majority vote of both houses. Once the bill is approved, then it passes very easily through a majority vote by the people of Texas. The Texas' governor cannot veto a proposal to amend the constitution after it has received enough votes from the two houses. As a result of this system, the amendments are frequent approaching 500 and above.
The only way of amending the Texas Constitution described by Article 17 is through the legislature followed by voter approval. Amendment of any sort either by initiative, constitutional convention, or any other means are not acceptable in the constitution hence are not legally binding. Once an amendment process is successful and has been approved by voters, it is compiled into the existing framework.
In contrast to the Texas Constitution, the Mississippi Constitution grants its citizens significant powers on referendum through the right of initiative and referendum (Waters 12). Article 15 section 273 of the Mississippi Constitution states that people have the authority to enact and propose a constitutional amendment by initiative. The action is only usable for a constitutional amendment and gathering of signatures take a twelve month period. Approval of the modification involves a 40% vote cast of all the votes during the Election Day.
My opinion is that Texas constitution should allow citizens to initiate the amendment process if need be. Public participation encourages the public on government trust in decision-making. It provides a platform for communication between government and people hence attribute to sustainable decision making. Furthermore, it allows for public values to be identified and integrated into decisions that affect them. Involvement of citizens in decision-making process boost citizen's confidence in the government, and this promotes a feeling of democracy which is an essential pillar of United States Constitution. Public participation in the amendment process may also be disadvantageous as it is time consuming and expensive but since it promotes citizens faith in government and involvement of citizen in decision making, I greatly advocate for the incorporation of this initiative on the Texas Constitution. Citizen's participation in decision making gives them a platform to fight against oppression and wrong decisions by the legislature hence provide a plain field in governance.
Work cited
Krasner, Stephen D. "Sharing Sovereignty: new institutions for collapsed and failing states." International Security 29.2 (2004): 85-120.
Waters, M. Dane. Initiative and referendum almanac. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2003.
Bruff, Harold H. "Separation of Powers Under the Texas Constitution." Tex. L. Rev. 68 (1989): 1337.
