Estimated Time to Read: 16 minutes
The Texas Legislature is set to return to Austin on July 21 for a special legislative session convened by Governor Greg Abbott (R). While a few anticipated items will likely make the call, several essential issues remain absent from the conversation. These overlooked priorities, if added, could turn a routine special session into a historic one.
Governor Abbott has already signaled that the session will include at least the following issues:
- Senate Bill 3 – Regulating consumable THC products
- Senate Bill 648 – Recording requirements for real estate documents
- Senate Bill 1253 – Water project impact fees
- Senate Bill 1278 – Protections for trafficking victims
- Senate Bill 1758 – Regulating cement kilns near semiconductor plants
- Senate Bill 2878 – Judicial branch administration reforms
- Possible legislation related to the July 4th flash floods in the Texas Hill Country, including the installation of civil defense sirens or other enhanced alert systems to improve emergency response capabilities
At Texas Policy Research, we believe this session should be about more than political maneuvering. It should be a moment to champion liberty, rein in government, and deliver real reform. Here are the twelve items we believe must be added to the agenda.
1. Ban on Taxpayer-Funded Lobbying
Taxpayers should not be forced to fund political advocacy against their own interests. In the recent regular session, Senate Bill 19, authored by Sen. Mayes Middleton (R-Galveston), attempted to curtail taxpayer-funded lobbying by prohibiting political subdivisions from hiring registered lobbyists or paying dues to associations that do. Unfortunately, an amendment by State Sen. Robert Nichols (R-Jacksonville) diluted the bill’s effectiveness as it was being considered by the Senate. SB 19 was never considered by the House State Affairs Committee, despite the committee’s chairman, State Rep. Ken King (R-Canadian), pledging to support such legislation.
According to a March 2025 report from the Texas Public Policy Foundation, local governments in Texas spent nearly $100 million, specifically, as much as $98.6 million, on contract lobbyists in 2023 alone, up from $75 million in 2021.
Despite its limitations, SB 19 passed the Senate and laid the groundwork for reform. A clean and comprehensive prohibition must be revived. Texans deserve to know their tax dollars aren’t being weaponized to grow government.
2. Compression-Based Property Tax Elimination
Texas has the revenue; what it lacks is the will. In the recent regular session, House Bill 275, authored by State Rep. Briscoe Cain (R-Deer Park) and House Bill 1553, authored by State Rep. Steve Toth (R-The Woodlands), proposed using surplus state funds to eliminate school M&O property taxes through compression. House Bill 2743, authored by State Rep. Helen Kerwin (R-Grandview), offered a similar path by dedicating a portion of surplus revenue for long-term tax rate buy-downs. None of these bills received hearings in the House Appropriations Committee.
Eliminating M&O taxes through compression would give Texans permanent relief while preserving optional local enrichment. Gov. Abbott has previously favored this method of tax relief and elimination. It’s a structural solution, not a short-term gimmick.
3. Constitutional Spending Limits and Voter Thresholds
Unchecked local spending is a major driver of tax burdens. In the recent regular session, House Bill 325, authored by State Rep. Briscoe Cain (R-Deer Park), would have capped municipal and county budget growth to population plus inflation, unless overridden by voters. House Bill 217, authored by State Rep. Brian Harrison (R-Midlothian), proposed raising the voter threshold to 60% for approving tax increases above the voter-approval rate.
Both bills failed to receive hearings in House committees, but their principles endure: fiscal discipline, local accountability, and meaningful taxpayer protections.
Local governments should be subjected to meaningful spending limits, just as the state is. Without guardrails, runaway local spending threatens to undo even the most significant tax relief passed at the state level.
Governor Abbott included requiring “all local bond issues and tax rate elections be on the November ballot and approved by a two-thirds supermajority of voters” as a part of his property tax relief emergency item in his 2025 State of the State Address. It was one of the issues ultimately not considered by the legislature in the recent regular session.
4. Accountability for Abortion Pill Distribution
While elective abortion is banned in Texas, abortion-inducing drugs continue to be trafficked via mail and online. In the recent regular session, Senate Bill 2880, the Women and Child Protection Act, would have addressed this issue through a civil-enforcement framework modeled after the Texas Heartbeat Act.
This issue has become a renewed priority for the state’s pro-life movement. Following the bill’s failure to reach the House floor before sine die, a coalition of pro-life lawmakers and advocacy groups, including Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) and Texas Right to Life, has publicly called on Governor Abbott to include it in the upcoming special session. The coalition’s letter, sent on the anniversary of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, emphasized that roughly 19,000 abortion-inducing pills are mailed into Texas annually and stressed the lack of enforcement tools to combat the trend, especially with respect to out-of-state actors.
The coalition noted recent incidents, including a North Texas man allegedly slipping abortion pills into his girlfriend’s drink, as evidence of a growing public safety threat. Their argument is clear: while abortion pills are illegal in Texas, the law lacks the civil enforcement infrastructure to effectively hold bad actors accountable. SB 2880 would address that gap.
SB 2880 reflects limited government and individual empowerment, holding bad actors accountable without expanding bureaucratic enforcement. Unfortunately, the bill passed the Texas Senate but was passed out of the House State Affairs Committee right before impending deadlines, and met its legislative demise in the House Calendars Committee.
5. Make Ivermectin Available Over the Counter
In the recent regular session, House Bill 3219, authored by State Rep. Joanne Shofner (R-Nacogdoches), would have authorized pharmacists to dispense Ivermectin without a prescription via a standing order. Despite strong public support and committee approval, the bill never received a House floor vote.
Ivermectin is a long-approved medication with an extensive safety record. Reclassifying it as OTC respects individual liberty and reduces unnecessary barriers to access. Texans should not need government permission for basic health decisions.
This issue has gained renewed momentum ahead of the special session. Shofner and 19 other Republican representatives signed a letter urging Governor Abbott to add the issue to the agenda. The letter emphasized that increasing access to safe, affordable treatments like Ivermectin reflects core conservative values of individual liberty, personal responsibility, and limited government.
Support for the reform extends beyond the Legislature. A petition circulating across Texas in support of adding Ivermectin reclassification to the special session has already gathered over 5,000 signatures. While four other states—Idaho, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Louisiana—have enacted similar laws, Texas has an opportunity to lead by example and reassert medical freedom as a legislative priority.
6. Ban on In-State Tuition for Illegal Aliens
In the recent regular session, Senate Bill 1798, authored by State Sen. Brandon Creighton (R-Conroe), would have ended taxpayer-subsidized in-state tuition and TASFA aid for illegal aliens. The bill passed the Senate but stalled in the House Higher Education Committee.
A recent federal court ruling has rendered Texas’s current policy unconstitutional. In response, State Rep. Mike Olcott (R-Aledo) and 29 other lawmakers sent a letter to public university system leaders across Texas, including the University of Texas, Texas A&M, and others, demanding that they immediately halt any residency-based tuition or aid for individuals who are not lawfully present. The lawmakers warned that noncompliance could expose institutions and their leaders to legal liability.
The ruling followed a joint legal filing by the State of Texas and the U.S. Department of Justice, which concluded that the 2001 Texas Dream Act violated federal law. A subsequent permanent injunction from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas now bars Texas from enforcing those provisions. Lawmakers specifically cited the Texas Application for State Financial Aid (TASFA) as a likely violator of federal statutes.
While some exceptions for merit- or need-based aid may remain legal if offered equally to all U.S. citizens, the letter cautioned against using such provisions to backdoor in-state benefits for illegal aliens.
With the court’s decision now binding, the Legislature must act to codify the repeal of in-state tuition for illegal aliens and bring the law in line with the Constitution and federal immigration law.
7. Ban on Guaranteed Income Programs
In the recent regular session, Senate Bill 2010, authored by State Sen. Paul Bettencourt (R-Houston), aimed to ban local governments from operating guaranteed income programs, which provide no-strings-attached cash payments. The bill permitted narrowly tailored, work-tied aid programs but barred universal basic income-style initiatives.
The need for this legislation was underscored by the failure of Harris County’s controversial guaranteed income pilot program. Initially branded as Uplift Harris and later renamed the Community Prosperity Program, the initiative was funded with $20.5 million in federal COVID-19 relief funds and planned to distribute $500 per month to nearly 1,900 low-income residents. However, after spending $1.7 million on administrative costs, the county never disbursed funds to a single recipient.
The Texas Supreme Court issued a stay halting the program following a lawsuit from Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), who argued that direct cash payments violate the Texas Constitution’s prohibition against local governments gifting public funds to individuals. In early June, Harris County Commissioners voted to officially end the program and redirect the remaining $14 million in funds elsewhere.
While SB 2010 passed the Senate, it failed to advance beyond the House Calendars Committee. Without legislative action, localities remain free to experiment with ideologically driven redistribution schemes on the taxpayer’s dime.
Texas should act now to prohibit these schemes statewide and reaffirm that government assistance should be tied to personal responsibility, not handed out unconditionally.
8. Library Access Restrictions for Minors
In the recent regular session, House Bill 3225, authored by State Rep. Daniel Alders (R-Tyler), would have restricted municipal libraries from labeling or curating sexually explicit content for minors. It required age-verification systems and created a petition process for citizens to challenge materials.
The bill passed the Texas House with strong bipartisan support but failed to receive a vote in the Senate before the session concluded. In response, Alders and 38 Republican House members sent a letter to Governor Abbott urging him to add the measure to the special session agenda.
Supporters argue that taxpayer-funded libraries across Texas currently contain books with graphic depictions of sexual conduct placed in sections labeled for minors. They emphasize that no child should unknowingly encounter such material and that parents must be the ones to decide what content is appropriate for their children.
9. Eliminate the STAAR Exam and Reform School Accountability
In the recent regular session, House Bill 4, authored by State Rep. Brad Buckley (R-Salado), proposed replacing the STAAR exam with a new, student-growth-based accountability system. It emphasized instructional alignment, local goal-setting, and due process protections for school districts. The bill would have replaced the single high-stakes exam with three shorter tests administered throughout the school year.
Though there was broad bipartisan support to move beyond the STAAR framework, the bill ultimately died in conference committee. Lawmakers in both chambers agreed on eliminating STAAR, but diverged on what the replacement system should look like. The House pushed for more legislative oversight and judicial review of accountability metrics, while the Senate sought to enhance the Texas Education Agency commissioner’s authority and limit school districts’ ability to challenge ratings in court.
Texas Policy Research opposed HB 4, not because we support the current STAAR regime, but because the bill’s proposed solution was flawed. HB 4 introduced a more expensive, bureaucratic, and intrusive framework that would have replaced one broken system with another. The bill was projected to cost nearly $200 million in its first biennium, increasing testing frequency to three times per year, and expanding the regulatory footprint of the Texas Education Agency. Instead of reducing the burden on schools, HB 4 risked increasing classroom disruptions and entrenching top-down mandates that undermine local flexibility.
For meaningful reform, Texas needs a simpler, leaner accountability system that empowers parents and educators, protects student privacy, and minimizes bureaucratic interference, not a triannual testing model wrapped in administrative complexity.
Texas Policy Research supports strong school accountability, but opposes one-size-fits-all high-stakes testing and expensive state mandates. It’s time to move beyond STAAR and toward a more transparent, locally responsive, and cost-effective model.
10. Moratorium on AI Regulation
Texas enacted an AI regulatory framework during the 89th Session that Texas Policy Research opposed. House Bill 149, authored by State Rep. Giovanni Capriglione (R-Southlake), while well-intentioned in seeking to promote transparency and protect biometric data, introduces a new regulatory framework that expands government scope, imposes steep compliance costs, and risks chilling innovation.
HB 149 establishes the Texas Artificial Intelligence Council and grants enforcement power to the Attorney General, with fines up to $100,000 per violation. While described as advisory, the Council’s mandate to evaluate ethics, civil liberties, and market impacts could lead to bureaucratic mission creep. The bill imposes a projected cost of $25 million over the next biennium and creates new compliance burdens for AI developers, including small businesses and open-source contributors, without clear relief or differentiation.
Congressional debate over AI regulation has evolved dramatically since 2023. Once centered around preemptive, fear-based regulation modeled on the EU’s restrictive approach, the conversation has shifted toward promoting U.S. global competitiveness, particularly in response to China’s aggressive AI development. Recent hearings emphasized the importance of removing supply chain restraints and avoiding a patchwork of state regulations, which industry leaders like OpenAI CEO Sam Altman warned would have disastrous consequences.
The now-passed “One Big Beautiful Bill” in Congress originally included a federal AI moratorium to prevent states from enacting their own regulations. While stripped from the final version, its inclusion signaled growing concern about regulatory overreach and inconsistent standards. More than 1,000 AI-related bills were introduced at the state level in early 2025, many of them vague and duplicative.
AI is not a distinct or stable technology; it is a marketing term used to describe a broad array of computational tools. Regulating it as such leads to arbitrary enforcement and excessive burdens. Texas should not compound the problem by layering on more restrictions.
A moratorium on new AI regulation would allow Texas to reassess its approach, prevent the escalation of burdens on innovators, and lead the nation in crafting smart, restraint-minded policy. That’s why Texas Policy Research supports placing an AI moratorium on the special session agenda.
11. End Corporate Welfare in All Forms
Whether through Chapter 313 successors, grant programs like JETI, or politically selective subsidies, corporate welfare distorts the market and undermines true free enterprise. Despite conservative rhetoric, the Legislature continues to pass bills that hand out taxpayer money to politically connected industries.
Texas has a long history of corporate welfare dating back to 1987, when lawmakers first amended the Constitution to permit economic development programs. The most notorious example was the Chapter 313 tax abatement program, which allowed school districts to offer deep tax breaks to companies in exchange for vague job creation promises. Though Chapter 313 expired in 2022, it was revived in 2023 under a new name: the Jobs, Energy, Technology and Innovation Act (JETI). Like its predecessor, JETI allows for massive property tax reductions without requiring offsetting spending cuts from the local districts that grant them.
One of the most egregious recent examples came with the passage of Senate Bill 22, authored by State Sen. Joan Huffman (R-Houston). This bill established the Texas Moving Image Industry Incentive Fund and allocated up to $1.5 billion in public funds over six years for film and multimedia productions. Administered by the Governor’s Office, the fund lacks meaningful legislative oversight and includes ideological content restrictions, barring projects that portray Texas or Texans “in a negative fashion.” This is corporate welfare dressed up as cultural gatekeeping, with taxpayer dollars used to favor politically acceptable narratives.
Other major corporate welfare programs include Chapter 312 abatements, the Texas Enterprise Fund, the Major Events Reimbursement Program, and renewable energy subsidies. These programs funnel public money to large companies, often without transparency, accountability, or measurable benefit to the average Texan. Even the Republican and Democratic Party platforms in Texas now call for prohibiting or repealing such practices.
Texas Policy Research urges lawmakers to end corporate welfare in all its forms. That means repealing Chapter 312 and 313-related programs, sunsetting discretionary grant funds like the Texas Enterprise Fund, eliminating ideologically-driven media incentives like SB 22, and halting selective tax breaks for politically favored industries. Economic development should be built on a level playing field, not rigged deals that benefit the few at the expense of the many.
12. Defend the Guard Legislation
Texas should not allow its National Guard troops to be sent into foreign wars without a formal declaration of war by Congress. In the recent regular session, House Bill 930, authored by State Rep. Briscoe Cain (R-Deer Park), would prohibit the deployment of Texas National Guard units into active combat duty unless Congress has declared war or acted under the War Powers Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This measure is part of a broader, nationwide “Defend the Guard” movement designed to reassert state sovereignty and constitutional governance.
Since September 11th, 2001, over 29,000 Texas National Guard members have been deployed under vague and outdated Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs). HB 930 would amend Chapter 437 of the Texas Government Code to block deployments based on executive overreach, ensuring that the Guard can only be used in foreign conflicts if Congress fulfills its constitutional duty.
With 84% of Republican primary voters in 2024 supporting a related ballot proposition, public support for this measure is undeniable. By passing HB 930, Texas would send a clear message: the lives of our Guardsmen are not bargaining chips in undeclared wars. This is not just a military issue; it is a constitutional and moral imperative.
Conclusion
This special session should be a moment of courage and clarity. Governor Abbott has an opportunity to shape a transformative agenda that reflects Texas values: liberty, limited government, and responsible stewardship of taxpayer resources.
We urge him to include these twelve issues on the agenda. Texans deserve nothing less.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
