Texans for Fiscal Responsibility has issued the following vote notice for April 29th, 2025

Texas House of Representatives

---

Subject: House Joint Resolution 7 (HJR 7) – Billions in new constitutional spending

• Author: State Rep. Cody Harris (R-Palestine)
• Caption: Proposing a constitutional amendment to dedicate a portion of the revenue derived from state sales and use taxes to the Texas water fund.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 7 seeks to constitutionally earmark up to $1 billion per year from state sales tax revenue for the Texas Water Fund. While water infrastructure is important, this measure removes large sums from the general revenue fund limiting legislative flexibility. It represents a long-term commitment of taxpayer dollars without sufficient legislative oversight. By constitutionally dedicating funds, lawmakers reduce the legislature’s ability to prioritize spending annually based on changing needs. The lack of reforms or spending guardrails on the Water Fund also raises concerns about transparency and efficiency. With the state’s history of under-delivering on accountability in large infrastructure funds, this amendment risks growing government bureaucracy without guaranteeing outcomes. Voters should be cautious of creating another permanent spending mechanism carved out of the budget.

Subject: House Joint Resolution 112 (HJR 112) – Protects parental rights in Constitution

• Author: State Rep. James Frank (R-Wichita Falls)
• Caption: Proposing a constitutional amendment protecting the right of parents to raise their children.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • HB 112 enshrines the fundamental right of parents to raise their children without unnecessary government interference. It constitutionally guarantees that decisions about a child’s upbringing—such as education, healthcare, and values—rest with parents, not bureaucrats or unelected judges. This amendment reinforces the principle that parents, not government agencies, are best suited to make choices for their children. It restrains the growth of state power and keeps decision-making closer to the home. It also reduces the risk of taxpayer-funded legal conflicts over parental rights by clarifying legal boundaries in advance. Codifying this protection into the Texas Constitution helps secure individual liberty, family autonomy, and taxpayer interests alike.

Subject: House Bill 34 (HB 34) – Bans investment in hostile nations

• Author: State Rep. Will Metcalf (R-Montgomery)
• Caption: Relating to prohibiting the investment of state money in certain countries and in certain private business entities in those countries.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • HB 34 protects Texas taxpayers by ensuring public funds are not invested in nations that pose a threat to U.S. national security, like China and Iran. The bill adds safeguards by requiring divestment from companies tied to these countries, preventing Texas from unintentionally funding adversarial governments. It also allows the governor, in consultation with state security officials, to expand the list as global threats evolve. This proactive measure minimizes financial risk, promotes economic security, and prevents public dollars from supporting hostile regimes. The bill promotes responsible state investing and ensures taxpayer funds are aligned with Texas’ security and values.

Subject: House Bill 133 (HB 133) – Protects Texans from foreign repression

• Author: State Rep. Janie Lopez (R-San Benito)
• Caption: Relating to creating the criminal offenses of transnational repression and unauthorized enforcement of foreign law and to a study and law enforcement training regarding transnational repression.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • HB 133 creates tough new penalties for individuals acting on behalf of foreign regimes or terrorist groups who intimidate or harm people in Texas for exercising free speech. By specifically targeting foreign-backed repression, the bill protects citizens’ constitutional rights while ensuring local law enforcement is prepared to handle these emerging threats. Rather than bloating bureaucracy, it responsibly leverages existing public safety structures to develop training. This bill strengthens national security without expanding the size or scope of government and helps deter hostile foreign actors from operating on Texas soil.

Subject: House Bill 112 (HB 112) – New taxpayer-backed economic development zones

• Author: State Rep. Angie Button (R-Garland)
• Caption: Relating to the creation and operation of a science park district in certain counties.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 112 sets up a new class of quasi-governmental entities called “science park districts” that can be created in major metro areas. These districts would have wide-ranging authority to issue revenue bonds, manage infrastructure projects, and partner with private companies, but without clear taxpayer safeguards or fiscal limits. Although framed as an economic development initiative, the bill creates a new layer of bureaucracy within the Office of the Governor and obligates taxpayers to fund its operations. It introduces long-term liabilities through bond issuance while shifting risk to the public without voter approval. Moreover, the bill opens the door to politically favored projects and corporate partnerships under vague criteria. This proposal is a classic example of mission creep—expanding state involvement in economic planning under the banner of “innovation.” Rather than focusing on broad-based reforms like tax cuts or regulatory relief, it grows government and subsidizes speculative ventures.

Subject: House Bill 119 (HB 119) – Ban foreign-funded lobbying

• Author: State Rep. Stan Gerdes (R-Smithville)
• Caption: Relating to the registration as a lobbyist of persons who engage in certain lobbying activities on behalf of a foreign adversary and to prohibitions on the receipt of compensation related to those lobbying activities; providing a civil penalty.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • HB 119 strengthens Texas’s safeguards against foreign interference by requiring anyone lobbying on behalf of a designated foreign adversary to register with the Texas Ethics Commission, ensuring that foreign-influenced lobbying doesn’t fly under the radar. Importantly, it bars these lobbyists from accepting any form of payment—cash or otherwise—from the foreign adversaries they represent. This helps block financial pipelines that could fund policy manipulation. The bill prioritizes national security and state sovereignty without creating new bureaucracies or increasing government spending. Enforcement is handled through civil courts, not new agencies, preserving limited-government principles. By making foreign actors financially radioactive in the lobbying sphere, the bill helps shield taxpayers from policies that serve hostile regimes.

Subject: House Bill 128 (HB 128) – Ban on adversary sister-cities

• Author: State Rep. Angelia Orr (R-Itasca)
• Caption: Relating to certain sister-city agreements between governmental entities and foreign countries and communities.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • HB 128 helps to protect Texas from foreign political influence by blocking sister-city relationships with hostile regimes such as China and Russia. These relationships, while seemingly cultural, can be exploited for espionage and soft power infiltration, risking taxpayer resources and local policy integrity. By preventing these agreements, the bill helps ensure state and local resources are not leveraged for foreign propaganda or influence operations. This aligns with the principle of limited government by focusing government diplomacy on secure, pro-American relationships. It also shields taxpayers from hidden costs or vulnerabilities associated with partnerships that do not serve the public interest.

Subject: House Bill 130 (HB 130) – Protects Texas genetic data

• Author: State Rep. Greg Bonnen (R-Friendswood)
• Caption: Relating to genetic information security for residents of this state; providing a civil penalty; providing a private cause of action.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • HB 130 protects Texans’ genetic data from being exploited by hostile foreign governments. The bill bans state-funded or Texas-based entities from using genome sequencing technology made by or linked to foreign adversaries like China. It requires that any genomic data from Texas residents be securely stored on U.S. soil, shielded from unauthorized access through strong encryption and cybersecurity practices. By preventing potential misuse of sensitive health data, the bill enhances national and state security. It holds violators financially accountable with significant civil penalties and empowers Texans to sue if harmed. This reduces state liability, ensures taxpayer dollars do not inadvertently fund foreign influence, and promotes limited government by enforcing clear rules without creating new bureaucracies.

Subject: House Bill 271 (HB 271) – Disability report mandate for colleges

• Author: State Rep. Mary González (D-San Elizario)
• Caption: Relating to a report by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board regarding enrollment and success in higher education for students with disabilities.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 271 imposes a new state mandate that expands the role of the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, requiring them to compile a broad report on disability accommodations across both public and private higher education institutions. While well-intentioned, the bill creates a bureaucratic reporting burden and diverts limited resources away from core educational outcomes and taxpayer priorities. It requires public institutions to allocate staff time and effort to comply with yet another state directive—potentially inflating administrative costs. Moreover, it invites state overreach into private and independent schools, raising concerns about mission creep and undermining institutional autonomy. The bill opens the door for future legislative mandates tied to undefined “barriers,” potentially paving the way for costly new programs or compliance requirements. It also represents a soft expansion of government data collection. With no concrete fiscal guardrails or cost-benefit justification, taxpayers may end up footing the bill for a report that leads to more government—not better education.

Subject: House Bill 621 (HB 621) – Protects political speech in POAs

• Author: State Rep. Jared Patterson (R-Frisco)
• Caption: Relating to the authority of a property owners’ association to regulate the assembly, association, and speech of property owners or residents related to governmental officials or candidates for political office.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • HB 621 protects residents’ rights in POA-governed communities by preventing associations from blocking access to shared spaces for political discourse. The bill stops POAs from selectively silencing political events or candidates who may not align with the board’s preferences—ensuring transparency, fairness, and viewpoint neutrality. Since residents already pay dues that maintain these spaces, they should have the freedom to use them equally. It curtails petty overreach by unelected boards while promoting civic participation. This supports free speech without adding regulation or cost to taxpayers.

Subject: House Bill 552 (HB 552) – Study on beekeeping taxes

• Author: State Rep. Mary González (D-San Elizario)
• Caption: Relating to a study by the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service to determine standards for the appraisal for ad valorem tax purposes of certain agricultural land used to raise or keep bees.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 552 mandates a state-funded study to reassess how land used for beekeeping is appraised for property tax purposes, despite existing standards already being in place. It directs a public university system to evaluate various factors—like colony count and pollination output—that could add bureaucratic complexity to a relatively narrow property classification. While framed as addressing inconsistencies in appraisal practices, the bill introduces another layer of government involvement without offering concrete cost-benefit justification. Instead of streamlining local governance, it centralizes appraisal evaluation under a state-led process that may ultimately restrict local flexibility. The study’s long timeline and open-ended scope risk unnecessary spending on a problem better handled through local reform or clearer statutory guidelines. From a taxpayer standpoint, this represents a questionable use of public resources with minimal demonstrable benefit. The bill grows government by initiating a redundant study rather than encouraging local solutions or deregulation.

Subject: House Bill 366 (HB 366) – Criminalizes political memes

• Author: State Rep. Dade Phelan (R-Beaumont)
• Caption: Relating to required disclosures on certain political advertising that contains altered media; creating a criminal offense.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 366 criminalizes the publication of political ads that use AI-generated or altered media unless those ads include a government-prescribed disclaimer. While framed as a transparency measure, the bill introduces broad new liabilities and mandates on political speech, empowering the Texas Ethics Commission to dictate formatting requirements. This opens the door to regulatory overreach and burdens smaller political actors with compliance costs. The vague standard of what “did not occur in reality” leaves room for subjective enforcement, potentially chilling satire, parody, or legitimate commentary. Creating a Class A misdemeanor for campaign speech represents a severe repression of constitutionally protected speech. This bill adds unnecessary government regulation, expands bureaucratic authority, and risks weaponizing the state against political dissent. It does little to address voter fraud or election integrity while increasing enforcement costs and litigation risks.

Subject: House Bill 1211 (HB 1211) – Unlimited tuition waiver for foster students

• Author: State Rep. John Lujan (R-San Antonio)
• Caption: Relating to tuition and fee exemptions at public institutions of higher education for certain students who were under the conservatorship of the Department of Family and Protective Services.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 1211 would permanently remove the age limit that currently requires students formerly in Texas foster care to enroll in college before turning 25 in order to qualify for free tuition and fee exemptions. While the bill aims to support vulnerable students, it extends open-ended access to taxpayer-funded college tuition with no enrollment deadline, increasing long-term costs to the state. Without any upper age limit, the exemption could be used decades after someone exits foster care, weakening accountability and planning for higher education. This opens the door to ongoing obligations without any cost containment or incentive for timely enrollment. Rather than targeting support efficiently, it shifts the burden to taxpayers indefinitely. The bill lacks provisions to evaluate outcomes or fiscal impact beyond enrollment. While well-intentioned, the proposal could grow state spending and dilute limited resources without clear guardrails.

Subject: House Bill 5333 (HB 5333) – Government-funded STEM graduate fellowships

• Author: State Rep. Greg Bonnen (R-Friendswood)
• Caption: Relating to the establishment of the STEM Excellence Graduate Fellowship program.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 5333 establishes a new state-managed fellowship program for select doctoral students in STEM fields. While it is presented as a way to attract academic talent, the bill opens the door to increased spending with little taxpayer oversight. It authorizes the use of public funds—and allows for indefinite solicitation of private and public money—to fund graduate-level education at public institutions. The bill gives broad discretion to a state agency to define award amounts and recipient criteria, bypassing typical rulemaking safeguards. From a limited-government standpoint, this program shifts state priorities toward subsidizing advanced degrees rather than reducing the tax burden on working Texans. It risks creating a pipeline of government-dependent funding for academic institutions and students. Instead of new spending programs, Texas should prioritize reducing bureaucracy and returning surplus funds to taxpayers.

Subject: House Bill 5265 (HB 5265) – Permanent healthcare education fund

• Author: State Rep. Terry Wilson (R-Georgetown)
• Caption: Relating to the Texas Health Care Workforce Education Fund.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 5265 creates a permanent education fund to funnel state-managed money to public universities for producing more health care degrees. It relies on a constitutional amendment and would divert taxpayer money into long-term government-controlled investment vehicles. While marketed as a workforce solution, it expands bureaucratic control over education funding and locks in future appropriations. The bill lacks safeguards to ensure cost-effectiveness or measurable outcomes, relying instead on state formulas and quotas to distribute money. It places no cap on administrative overhead or waste. Startup grants add another layer of spending, fueling government-driven academic expansion instead of private sector or nonprofit innovation. From a limited government standpoint, this bill entrenches state intervention and expands higher education funding commitments, when the priority should be tax relief and deregulation.

Subject: House Bill 1576 (HB 1576) – Taxpayer-funded home upgrades

• Author: State Rep. Tom Oliverson (R-Cypress)
• Caption: Relating to a grant program for hurricane and windstorm loss mitigation for single-family residential property.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 1576 creates a new government-run grant program to fund home improvements for storm protection, managed by the Texas Department of Insurance. While marketed as a safety initiative, the program opens the door for increased state spending and dependency on government subsidies for private property upgrades. It authorizes the creation of a dedicated fund in the general revenue system, which may grow over time with legislative appropriations of taxpayer money. Instead of promoting personal responsibility or market-based solutions like insurance reforms or private mitigation incentives, this bill adds bureaucracy and long-term budget commitments. This is a step toward bloated government and misuse of public funds for private benefit.

Subject: House Bill 2013 (HB 2013) – Limits restrictions on chickens

• Author: State Rep. Cecil Bell Jr (R-Magnolia)
• Caption: Relating to the authority of certain property owners’ associations to prohibit or restrict the keeping of chickens.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • HB 2013 ensures that if a city allows residents to keep chickens, local property owners’ associations can’t override that right with restrictive rules. This bill protects homeowners from overregulation by unelected POA boards. By limiting POA overreach, the bill upholds property rights without adding any new government mandates or costs. It also prevents duplicative rules, streamlining governance for property owners. The bill empowers homeowners to make practical, sustainable choices for their properties. Importantly, it does not impose any new burdens on taxpayers or government agencies. Supporting this bill means defending individual liberty, cutting unnecessary red tape, and limiting the influence of private, quasi mini-governments.

Subject: House Bill 2520 (HB 2520) – Expands open meetings transparency

• Author: State Rep. Ann Johnson (D-Houston)
• Caption: Relating to the open meetings law.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • HB 2520 strengthens government transparency by explicitly requiring state-appointed boards of managers, often used in school takeovers, to follow open meetings laws. It closes loopholes that allowed these unelected officials to operate behind closed doors while making major decisions affecting local taxpayers and students. The bill also ensures the public receives meaningful meeting agendas so they can monitor what they are doing. It limits the use of closed meetings to only truly sensitive personnel matters and prevents bureaucrats from hiding broad policy discussions under the guise of personnel issues. By repealing outdated secrecy provisions, the bill affirms that taxpayers have a right to observe decisions that impact them.

Subject: House Bill 1804 (HB 1804) – Expands Ethics Commission authority

• Author: State Rep. Carl Tepper (R-Lubbock)
• Caption: Relating to compliance with the filing requirements of certain reports of political contributions and expenditures and financial statements, including as a qualification for public elective office; providing an administrative penalty.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 1804 gives unelected bureaucrats more power to disqualify candidates and remove elected officials over filing delays, expanding state control over local elections. It forces the Texas Ethics Commission to police campaign report websites of cities and counties, adding costly oversight and potential daily fines of up to $5,000 on local governments—costs that could be passed to taxpayers. Rather than empowering voters to hold officials accountable, the bill centralizes authority and allows TEC to effectively override election outcomes. This undermines voter discretion and opens the door for politically motivated enforcement. The measure also expands state bureaucracy by hiring more government employees and creates a near half-million-dollar cost to taxpayers over just two years. In essence, HB 1804 imposes punitive mandates while growing government oversight and administrative power. Taxpayers should be concerned about new state costs, potential local penalties, and the erosion of voter choice. Limited government means trusting voters—not regulators—with electoral decisions.

Subject: House Bill 3611 (HB 3611) – Increased penalties for signage

• Author: State Rep. Pat Curry (R-Waco)
• Caption: Relating to the civil penalty for certain signs placed on the right-of-way of a public road.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE / AMEND
• Background: 
  • HB 3611 seeks to deter illegal signage by increasing civil penalties, but the bill raises concerns. While reducing visual clutter and ensuring road safety are legitimate goals, the bill expands enforcement authority, and the increased fines may disproportionately impact small businesses while larger businesses can absorb the costs as a routine expense. To improve the bill, lawmakers should ensure that only those who directly authorize or direct the placement of the signage are held responsible, not the businesses advertised or other individuals. 

Subject: House Bill 5616 (HB 5616) – Taxpayer fund for presidential libraries

• Author: State Rep. Donna Howard (D-Austin)
• Caption: Relating to the Texas presidential library promotion program and fund.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • HB 5616 creates a new taxpayer-supported promotional program to elevate three presidential libraries in Texas. While framed as an educational and tourism initiative, the bill expands government involvement in these museum operations that should remain private or nonprofit-led. The legislation opens the door to indefinite public spending on exhibit renovations, mobile displays, and tourism campaigns that benefit already well-endowed institutions. It creates a new fund in general revenue and authorizes state contracts with nonprofits, raising concerns about political favoritism and mission creep. The bill prioritizes legacy promotion over pressing fiscal issues and taxpayer burdens.

Texas Senate

---

Subject: Senate Joint Resolution 59 (SJR 59) – Dedicated fund for Texas State Technical College

• Author: State Sen. Brian Birdwell (R-Granbury)
• Caption: Proposing a constitutional amendment providing for the creation of funds to support the capital needs of educational programs offered by the Texas State Technical College System and repealing the limitation on the allocation to that system and its campuses of the annual appropriation of certain constitutionally dedicated funding for public institutions of higher education.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • SJR 59 proposes a constitutional amendment to create two new state-managed funds specifically for capital investments and infrastructure at the Texas State Technical College System. These funds would exist outside the general revenue stream and receive continuous funding with investment returns distributed annually. Unlike most state programs, this funding would be automatically appropriated without further legislative approval, removing oversight. The bill repeals an existing safeguard that caps TSTC’s allocation from constitutionally dedicated higher education funding. The bill limits flexibility in budgeting. It also expands government spending obligations and increases the risk of future calls for similar carveouts by other institutions. This amendment entrenches a long-term funding stream in the constitution that lacks strong taxpayer accountability measures. Taxpayers will end up footing the bill for permanent infrastructure commitments regardless of TSTC’s performance or need, at a time when the legislature should be prioritizing property tax relief.

Subject: Senate Bill 324 (SB 324) – Mandatory E-verify

• Author: State Sen. Lois Kolkhorst (R-Brenham)
• Caption: Relating to requiring state contractors, political subdivisions of this state, and private employers to participate in the federal electronic verification of employment authorization program, or E-verify.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • SB 324 strengthens the integrity of the Texas workforce by requiring every employer—public and private—to verify the legal status of new hires using the federal E-Verify system. This move closes current loopholes that allow some employers to avoid verification, ensuring fairer competition for businesses that follow the law. It empowers state agencies to enforce compliance by linking it to licensing and contracts, discouraging abuse of public funds. Political subdivisions and contractors will face real consequences for violating the law, with penalties including contract bans and employee termination. This bill promotes accountability, reduces the burden of illegal employment on taxpayer-funded services, and ensures that taxpayer dollars are not used to subsidize companies that hire illegal immigrants.

Subject: Senate Bill 1049 (SB 1049) – Excused absences for faith education

• Author: State Sen. Phil King (R-Weatherford)
• Caption: Relating to excused absences from public school for the purpose of attending a released time course.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • SB 1049 strengthens parental rights by ensuring that public schools must allow students to be excused for religious education, so long as parents request it. This policy respects family values without expanding government control. Responsibility for attendance, transportation, and liability lies with the private organization offering the course, not the public school. This ensures no additional burden is placed on schools or taxpayers. By reducing bureaucratic interference in a family’s religious choices, this bill empowers parents without growing government.

Subject: Senate Bill 1754 (SB 1754) – Ends property tax breaks for renewables

• Author: State Sen. Brian Birdwell (R-Granbury)
• Caption: Relating to the authority of a taxing unit to enter into an agreement to exempt from ad valorem taxation a portion of the value of property on which a renewable energy facility is located or is planned to be located.
• TFR Position: SUPPORT
• Background: 
  • SB 1754 stops cities and counties in Texas from giving property tax breaks to wind, solar, or standalone battery facilities that sell power wholesale into the grid. By eliminating local subsidies, the bill aims to protect taxpayers from propping up industries that already receive massive federal incentives. It promotes a level playing field and encourages fiscal discipline at the local level. Overall, S.B. 1754 is a strong step toward limiting government favoritism and defending taxpayers from more taxpayer-funded tax breaks.

Subject: Senate Bill 2308 (SB 2308) – Taxpayer-supported pharma research grants

• Author: State Sen. Tan Parker (R-Flower Mound)
• Caption: Relating to the establishment of a grant program to fund the United States Food and Drug Administration’s drug development trials with ibogaine for the purpose of securing the administration’s approval as a medication for treatment of opioid use disorder, co-occurring substance use disorder, and any other neurological or mental health conditions for which ibogaine demonstrates efficacy and the administration of that treatment.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • SB 2308 would create a new state-run grant program to support FDA trials for ibogaine, a psychedelic drug not yet approved for medical use. The bill expands the role of state government in experimental drug development, creating unnecessary administrative complexity and long-term financial exposure. The program essentially picks winners in the biotech space, inviting the state to entangle itself in the commercial development and intellectual property of a Schedule I substance. Despite requiring matching funds from applicants, taxpayers would still bear the cost of overseeing the program and enforcing compliance. From a limited-government viewpoint, this bill opens the door to bureaucratic mission creep, with HHSC managing projects far beyond its core responsibilities. Public health challenges should be addressed through regulatory reform, the free market—not government-sponsored pharmaceutical ventures.

Subject: Senate Bill 2366 (SB 2366) – Railroad subsidy

• Author: State Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola)
• Caption: Relating to a grant program to fund certain short line railroad projects.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • SB 2366 sets up a new government grant program to subsidize privately owned short line railroads, using state-appropriated funds to improve or restore rail infrastructure. While marketed as a way to enhance safety and economic development, it represents a public subsidy for a specific industry. Though the bill requires 10% non-state matching funds, the bulk of financing still comes from taxpayers, and no clear cap limits total future liabilities. The bill excludes use of the state highway fund but opens the door to other general revenue uses, increasing the scope of state spending. This creates a new layer of bureaucracy and taxpayer funded projects. Other states’ programs are cited as justification, but competition for federal grants shouldn’t override principles of fiscal restraint.

Subject: Senate Bill 2844 (SB 2844) – Harsh penalties on deer breeders

• Author: State Sen. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock)
• Caption: Relating to the regulation of deer breeding; creating criminal offenses.
• TFR Position: OPPOSE
• Background: 
  • SB 2844 tightens restrictions on deer breeders in Texas by slashing allowable enclosure sizes for new operations and imposing a host of new criminal penalties. It elevates recordkeeping and compliance failures to the level of misdemeanors or even felonies, adding regulatory weight to already burdened small agricultural operations. While framed as a disease prevention measure, the bill risks criminalizing minor infractions and opens the door to aggressive enforcement against family-run or rural breeders. Limiting future enclosures to just 20 acres—one-fifth of previous allowances—discourages new private investment in breeding enterprises. By expanding criminal liability, the bill could create legal minefields instead of promoting responsible wildlife management. For taxpayers, this represents another example of expanded regulatory overreach that adds compliance costs but no clear public benefit. The legislation penalizes lawful businesses and expands state involvement in private agricultural practices.

---

---

Reminder: Vote Notices are provided to both Texas state lawmakers and the general public, sharing Texans for Fiscal Responsibility’s position on issues to be rated as a part of the Fiscal Responsibility Index. Notices are provided prior to votes being taken in each legislative chamber.

Disclaimer: We reserve the right to consider amendments to legislation that may be introduced without notice as a part of issues to be rated on the Fiscal Responsibility Index. We will make every effort to provide notice on amendments that are pre-filed.