Since its ratification in 1974, the Louisiana Constitution has undergone 217 amendments. On Dec. 7, Louisiana voters could boost that number to 221.
The Public Affairs Research Council (PAR), a nonpartisan governmental research organization led various public discussions regarding the four amendments and compiled a 13-page report detailing each measure.
Here is a summary.
Amendment #1: Politically appointed judicial watchdogs and increased flexibility for the Supreme Court
Voting yes to Amendment 1 would expand the number of appointees to the Louisiana Judiciary Commission, the state's judicial oversight system. The commission investigates judges for misconduct and makes recommendations to the Louisiana Supreme Court, the body ultimately responsible for initiating disciplinary action.
Currently, there are nine part-time commission members appointed by various judicial associations: three judges, three lawyers, and three citizens who are neither judges nor lawyers.
If passed, Amendment 1 would expand the commission by five to a total of 14 members: two members appointed by the state House of Representatives, two appointed by the Senate, and one appointed by the governor.
The changes aim to increase transparency and efficiency in a system bogged down by high caseloads and low public awareness. Proponents argue adding additional nonlawyers to its makeup would make the commission more impartial.
“The concern this is trying to address is the fox guarding the henhouse issue,” said Daniel Erspamer, CEO of Pelican Institute, a right-leaning think tank. “I think what it does do is allow for some individuals who may be able to better represent concerns that the public has about the conduct of judges.”
Detractors worry the five additional members – who don’t need any requirements –could polarize a traditionally nonpartisan system.
“Throwing five political appointees that can be anybody down the street…that doesn’t seem like a great solution that we want to put in the constitution,” said Barry Erwin, President of Council for a Better Louisiana (CABL). “Perhaps it could open up the door for the legislator to write those rules.”
Other skeptics like Jan Moller, executive director of left-leaning Invest in Louisiana, see hiring additional full-time staff as a better solution to increasing efficiency. In 2023, one lead investigator and five full-time lawyers handled 280 cases brought to the Judiciary Commission.
Amendment 1 would also empower the Supreme Court to directly instruct the Judiciary Commission to investigate cases, strengthening its authority beyond the current system where only the commission can initiate disciplinary proceedings.
Other major changes include allowing the Supreme Court to place judges on paid leave and set deadlines for investigations.
Amendments 2 and 3: More time for lawmakers to review budgets
Amendments 2 and 3, both spearheaded by Rep. Tony Bacala (R-Ascension Parish), stem from a chaotic 2023 regular session when state lawmakers were rushed to pass a $52 billion budget bill in the session’s final hours.
Amendment 2 would require the state legislature to wait at least 48 hours after submitting final amendments and summary documents before the final passage of an appropriations bill.
“It's not all the different steps a bill has to go through…and it only applies to appropriations or budget bills,” said Stephen Procopio, the president of PAR.
Amendment 2 aims to ensure legislators have full knowledge of how they spend billions of taxpayer dollars while discouraging tacking on last-minute projects to state budgets.
“It's the old ‘we have to pass it to see what's in it mindset,” said Erspamer. “That happens far too often.”
Some see the bill as an overprotective guardrail for policymakers. According to Moller, legislators elect the House and Senate leaders they trust to handle budgets. Just because the process didn’t work in 2023 doesn’t warrant a constitutional change, he said.
“It's taking a sledgehammer to kill a fly,” said Moller. “Even if you give them two days or two weeks most of them aren’t going to read every detail of those reports.”
Alternatives include more incremental steps designed to give policymakers time to review budgets, like through state law. Nearly identical 48-hour rules already exist in the House and Senate but are often waived with a majority vote.
“Why don't we do it instead in statute?... Raise the bar to 2/3rds, 3/4ths?” said Erwin.
Amendment 3 complements Amendment 2 by addressing potential time constraints associated with a 48-hour review requirement. Currently, if lawmakers aren’t able to pass a budget before a regular session ends, the entire process must restart in a special session. Amendment 3 is designed to safeguard that by allowing for the extension of a regular session by up to six days – in two-day increments – specifically for appropriations bills.
“Deadlines focus the mind, but sometimes you need a little extra time,” said Moller.
While Amendments 2 and 3 are philosophically linked, neither bill is dependent on the passage of the other, said Procopio. Similar arguments against Amendment 2 persist for Amendment 3, mainly that lawmakers shouldn’t have to be babysat by the constitution to handle their business at the cost of taxpayer dollars.
“On the one hand, extending six days could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars because you have staff working,” said Procopio. On the other hand, he said special sessions would almost certainly take longer.
Amendment 4: Overhauling Louisiana’s complicated tax sales system
“Of the 10 years I’ve been at PAR, that is the most complicated constitutional amendment I've ever had to deal with,” said Procopio at a Baton Rouge Press Club meeting.
When property owners in Louisiana fail to pay taxes, the government can seize their property and auction it off. The proceeds from the sale must cover the former owner's debts to local governments but are often sold well below market value. The winning bidder, usually an investor or real estate developer, doesn't necessarily receive full ownership but gets a corresponding percentage of ownership interest.
The original owner, or delinquent taxpayer, has three years to redeem their property by paying the investor the sale price, plus a 5% penalty and 1% monthly interest. If after three years the debt remains unsettled, the property either goes to the investor outright or to a “sheriff's sale” that ultimately ends with the investor making a profit or at least getting repaid.
"You don't have a clean title to it," said Procopio, referring to investors. "But if you wait long enough, you can put it back into commerce."
A recent Supreme Court ruling suggests this system might violate due process rights. In May 2023, the high court ruled that a Minnesota county violated a woman's rights by seizing her unoccupied condo for $15,000 in delinquent property taxes, selling it for $40,000, and keeping the excess proceeds after settling her tax bill.
"They took more than the government was allowed to take, so they said that was unconstitutional," Procopio added. Minnesota is one of the few states with a tax sale system similar to Louisiana's.
Another headache in Louisiana's current system arises with multiple property owners. For example, when someone dies and their property is abandoned, ownership is equally divided among all remaining heirs.
"You might have dozens of owners of a property that's been abandoned for a long time," said Procopio.
If one of those owners isn't notified, the sale can be nullified.
"Particularly after Katrina, people figured out how difficult it was to put property back into commerce," he added.
If Amendment 4 passes, instead of selling off someone's property to pay their debts, the government would auction off a tax lien – the property owner's unpaid debts.
"Instead of the whole $100,000 house being up for auction, it's the $30,000 in debt," Procopio explained.
After the sale, the lien operates like a mortgage. The delinquent taxpayer must pay back their debt, plus interest, within three years. If they don't, the lien holder can force the original owner to sell their property, essentially issuing a foreclosure. Any excess money from the final sale would go to the original property owner.
"The new system is a little more protective of the original owners in the sense that they get some of their money back if more than the amount to pay off the debt comes out of the sale," Procopio noted.
Amendment 4 would also remove most of the language regarding tax sales from the constitution, giving legislators the power to overhaul the system as long as it's through the lien process. "We're cleaning up the constitution and putting in place a dramatically new system," said Erwin.
There is currently an 80-page piece of companion legislation that Amendment 4 would trigger on January 2026 if it passes.
Proponents like Erwin argue the present system moves too slowly and is increasingly bogged down by litigation. Some critics, however, believe the new system would discourage potential investors from redeveloping blighted areas because of possible lengthier timelines and the elimination of ownership incentives.
Amendment 4 would make changes to Article VII, which according to Procopio, is responsible for over half of the 300-plus amendments residents have voted on since the constitution was first signed. Today, Article VII’s 28 sections make it nearly as long as the original constitution.
“That shows you how much we’ve put into the constitution that should probably be put in statute,” said Procopio.
