Sorry about the intemperate harangue. Long day. No excuse. The article is neither shocking nor shameful. I do believe it editorializes too much. I also believe that the characterization of the facts are not quite accurate. Perhaps quoting more of Dexter Johnson's letter (that is the one being referenced, right?) would give the fuller context for the remark. Could the legislature do anything with the money at any time? Not really, no. Could the legislature write and pass a superseding law? Yes, but the law would have to be passed. Saying that the legislature can spend the money "any way it chooses" makes it sound as if there is no process, no constraint of law. Johnson's letter was making the point that laws can be changed through legislative process. The people can, through the initiative process, change laws that the legislature has passed.  The legislature can change laws the people have passed. That is the way things work. Again, I think it is a strength for M97 to be amendable.