Texas Constitution: Structure, Flaws, and the Case for Reform
This paper examines the Texas Constitution of 1876, analyzing its defining characteristics, philosophical underpinnings, and structural shortcomings. The paper traces the document's deep-rooted mistrust of government, reflected in its fragmented executive power, restricted taxing authority, and reliance on long-ballot elections. It compares the Texas Constitution's 93,000–98,000 words and nearly 500 amendments to the U.S. Constitution's 6,500 words, arguing the Texas document is unwieldy and ill-suited for modern governance. The paper also reviews the failed mid-1970s constitutional revision effort, identifying voter disengagement and political sabotage as key causes of failure, before proposing a more transparent, technology-enabled constitutional convention as a path forward.
- Introduction: What a Constitution Does: Defines constitutions and introduces Texas's 1876 document
- Anti-Government Philosophy of the Texas Constitution: Examines deep distrust of government embedded in text
- Structural Problems: Length, Detail, and Fragmentation: Analyzes unwieldy length and fragmented executive power
- Comparison with the U.S. Constitution: Contrasts Texas document's size with federal constitution
- The Failed 1970s Revision Effort: Reviews why the 1970s constitutional revision attempt failed
- The Case for Modern Constitutional Reform: Proposes transparent, technology-enabled revision convention
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds its critique in concrete evidence, including the word-count comparison between the Texas and U.S. constitutions, which gives the reader an immediate, tangible sense of the document's excess.
- Balances descriptive analysis with normative argument, explaining both what the Texas Constitution does and why that matters for modern governance.
- Uses a well-structured historical case study — the 1970s revision attempt — to illustrate the practical barriers to reform, making the policy argument more credible.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative constitutional analysis by measuring the Texas document against the U.S. Constitution in terms of length, amendment count, and governing scope. This technique transforms what could be a purely abstract critique into an argument supported by quantifiable contrasts, a useful method for undergraduate political science writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by defining the purpose of constitutions generally before narrowing to Texas's 1876 document. It then examines the anti-government philosophy embedded in the text, moves through specific structural defects (length, fragmentation, over-detail), deploys a quantitative comparison with the federal constitution, recounts the failed 1970s revision as a cautionary case, and closes with a forward-looking proposal for a more transparent, technology-enabled revision process.
Introduction: What a Constitution Does
On the most fundamental level, a constitution is a plan or contract between the government and the people it governs. A constitution details the agreed-upon powers, responsibilities, and limitations upon all involved parties while asserting the proper procedures for action. The constitution is the foundation for all basic laws upon which the legal system rests. In the history of Texas, seven separate constitutions have been drafted and approved, with the last one receiving approval on February 15, 1876. The preceding six constitutions were adopted during the following years: 1827, 1836, 1845, 1861, 1866, and 1869. At this time, the current constitution contains amendments that were approved by voters as recently as November 2017.
An examination of the Texas Constitution reflects certain insights about the state and its unique viewpoints on government, autonomy, and self-protection. Any state constitution should assert a basic structure of government, itemizing who holds which powers when it comes to the people versus the government. Secondly, constitutions have the duty of narrowing the overall power of government by establishing civil liberties held by the people that the government may not breach. While the Texas Constitution technically fulfills its essential duties, the mistrust of government that pervades the state's lineage and culture ensures that the creation of government policy is a difficult task.
Anti-Government Philosophy of the Texas Constitution
One of the more striking elements of the Texas Constitution is that it reflects a deep mistrust of government and a marked resistance to change. One of the ways this mistrust manifests is through the sheer size of the document. The document is 93,000 words long, making it unwieldy and difficult to use and apply effectively. As some scholars assert, "It reflects the state's individualistic political culture and a mistrust of government, which have translated into weak political institutions across the board. Consistent with its original intent of ensuring state government would never be oppressive, the Texas Constitution fragments and limits government power" (Coleman). The massive size of the document makes it both too long and too complicated to use, and many have criticized it for being deliberately poorly organized. The overwhelming length and often indecipherable structure undermine all efforts to create change, particularly for a modern society with all the complexities of contemporary life.
Some argue that an overall distrust of government is the most prominent feature of the Texas Constitution as a whole (Collier et al., 62). "Article I underscores the attitudes of most Texans that 'all political power is inherent in the people, all free governments are founded on their authority… they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform, or abolish their government in such a manner as they may think expedient'" (Collier et al., 62). Anti-government notions such as these are found throughout the document. For example, the contexts in which the government can tax and accumulate debt are clearly itemized so that the government can be kept small; the powers and money given to the executive branch and state legislature are intentionally kept limited. Another manifestation of this trend is the use of the long ballot, meaning that all positions in the state are filled via election rather than appointment (Collier et al., 62).
This can at times conflict with the political preference for limited government, as constitutional reform and revision continue to struggle to gain support (Collier et al., 62). Some aspects of the document that seek to limit government power actually undermine this objective by making the document excessively long-winded. For example, the constitution itemizes the categories of taxes the legislature can and cannot charge, clearly restricting property tax and forbidding the government from imposing a state income tax without the express approval of the majority of voters. While the powers of government may be limited, the constitution fails to create an efficient political system.
Structural Problems: Length, Detail, and Fragmentation
Furthermore, one of the problems that demands constitutional change is not simply the length of the document, but the number of minute details it includes. The excessive details make the document difficult for the average individual to comprehend and absorb. All such added details should be placed in smaller statutory laws that could be forwarded by a legislature and later ratified by the government. Another issue caused by the Texas Constitution is that it helps create a fragmented executive branch. The governor is unable to control state authorities directly but must instead share power with them; this pattern is also replicated at the county level. Hence, in doing its best to limit the power of state government, the constitution essentially cripples the government from providing any meaningful service of value in modern society. It is one thing to limit a government's power and to ensure that the individual citizen is protected from tyranny; it is a far different matter to render the government almost entirely ineffective.
Significant changes could make the Texas Constitution a living document better able to meet the needs of an economically complex and modern world, while contributing to a more successful political system. As scholars of separation of powers have noted, the fragmentation of executive authority can impede responsive governance even when such fragmentation is intended to protect individual liberty (Bruff, 1339).
Works Cited
Bruff, Harold H. "Separation of Powers Under the Texas Constitution." Tex. L. Rev. 68 (1989): 1337.
Coleman, Michael. "The Persistence of Limited Government?" Home, 2017, dlc.dcccd.edu/txgov1-2/the-persistence-of-limited-government. Accessed 13 Feb. 2018.
Collier, Ken, Steven Galatas, and Julie Harrelson-Stephens. Lone Star Politics: Tradition and Transformation in Texas. Sage, 2013.
Utexas.edu. "Texas Politics: The Constitution." 2006, www.laits.utexas.edu/txp_media/html/cons/print_cons.html#61. Accessed 13 Feb. 2018.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.