HB 1 is a sweeping disaster preparedness and response bill that would create new statewide programs, licensing systems, and operational requirements for both government officials and private citizens who participate in disaster management. While it is intended to address the coordination, training, and communication deficiencies revealed by the July 2025 floods, the bill accomplishes these goals by expanding the size and scope of state government in ways that raise concerns for individual liberty, local autonomy, and long-term fiscal responsibility.
The measure’s most consequential provisions include a mandatory emergency manager licensing program and a statewide volunteer registration and credentialing system. Under HB 1, no one could serve as a local emergency management coordinator without holding a state-issued license, whether basic, intermediate, or advanced, based on training hours and years of experience. Licenses would require annual renewal, continuing education, and could be denied, suspended, or revoked by the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM). Similarly, all volunteers deployed by state or local agencies in disaster response or recovery would have to register in a centralized state database, undergo credentialing, and submit to a criminal history check, with TDEM given broad authority to set disqualifying criteria. While coordination and training are important, these mandates centralize control over who may serve, replacing local discretion and voluntary initiative with state gatekeeping.
These systems also have significant fiscal implications. The Legislative Budget Board projects more than $1 million in startup costs for TDEM and the Department of State Health Services (DSHS) in the first biennium, including $808,333 in FY 2026 and $191,667 in FY 2027 for TDEM to operate the volunteer database, develop training programs, and set up licensing infrastructure, plus $130,718 in FY 2026 and $165,468 in FY 2027 for DSHS to hire a full-time program coordinator for communications planning. The bill also calls for a new mass fatality data management system with unknown development costs. While some expenses could be offset by license and background check fees, gifts, grants, or donations, the number of participants and revenue potential are unknown. This makes it highly likely that sustaining these new programs will fall to taxpayers over the long term.
From a principles perspective, HB 1’s approach raises multiple red flags. The volunteer database requirement effectively conditions participation in official disaster relief on prior government approval, undermining the longstanding Texas tradition of spontaneous, neighbor-to-neighbor aid in times of crisis. The licensing mandate restricts who may serve in critical local roles, even if a community prefers to appoint someone with extensive practical experience but lacking the specific state-issued credential. These measures reduce flexibility, delay response capacity, and risk discouraging willing and capable participants. While the bill also includes some positive elements, notably enhanced training for justices of the peace in counties without medical examiners, structured mass fatality response protocols, and improved communications planning, these benefits do not outweigh the drawbacks of increased bureaucracy and diminished local control.
Given these concerns, the bill requires significant amendment before it could be supported. Specifically, lawmakers should consider limiting the volunteer registration requirement to specialized, high-risk assignments where credentialing is truly necessary; recognizing equivalent military, private-sector, or out-of-state credentials for emergency manager roles; narrowly defining criminal history criteria to those offenses relevant to disaster response; and adding sunset provisions to ensure that new programs continue only if they demonstrate measurable value. Without these changes, HB 1 risks creating costly, permanent state-run systems that reduce local independence, infringe on individual liberty, and expand state power beyond what is necessary to achieve effective disaster preparedness.
As such, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on HB 1 unless amended as described above. While HB 1 addresses genuine needs, in its current form, it prioritizes centralized control and regulatory expansion over the principles of limited government, personal responsibility, and community-driven resilience.
- Individual Liberty: The bill restricts individual freedom by making participation in government-directed disaster relief contingent on state approval. Volunteers would be required to register in a statewide database, undergo credentialing, and pass a criminal history check before being deployed, with TDEM empowered to set disqualifying criteria. This framework could prevent willing, capable individuals from assisting their neighbors in an official capacity solely because they have not navigated the state’s process or fail an overly broad background standard. Likewise, the emergency manager licensing mandate limits who can serve in that role, even at the local level, to those holding a state-issued credential, reducing communities’ ability to choose their own coordinators. While intended to ensure competence and safety, these provisions shift the balance toward state gatekeeping at the expense of free participation in civic response efforts.
- Personal Responsibility: The bill promotes personal responsibility in one sense by requiring that emergency managers and certain volunteers be trained and vetted, ensuring they are prepared for their duties. The justice of the peace training mandate could also enhance readiness for mass fatality events in counties without medical examiners. However, because these requirements are compulsory and centrally administered, they replace voluntary self-preparation with state-mandated compliance, reducing individuals’ ability to decide for themselves how best to prepare and serve their communities.
- Free Enterprise: The bill's primary impact on free enterprise is indirect, but the broader structure of state-managed licensing and volunteer credentialing imposes new compliance costs for individuals who contract or work with public agencies in disaster roles. For those in emergency management consulting or training, the state credential requirement could limit market entry to those who meet the specific state-defined criteria, narrowing the field of potential providers.
- Private Property Rights: The bill does not directly take or regulate private property, but by imposing new conditions on who can participate in certain disaster-related activities, it affects how property owners may contribute their skills, equipment, or land to response efforts under official coordination. For example, a rancher with heavy equipment might be barred from operating under a government-directed debris-clearing program without completing the state’s credentialing process.
- Limited Government: The bill significantly expands the role and reach of state government in disaster management. It creates new state-run programs, including an emergency manager licensing regime, a centralized volunteer database, and a mass fatality tracking system, and grants TDEM broad new rulemaking and enforcement authority. These systems shift disaster readiness and response further from local control toward centralized oversight, increasing bureaucracy and likely requiring ongoing taxpayer funding. Without safeguards like sunset clauses, narrow rulemaking limits, or deference to local discretion, this expansion runs counter to the limited government principle by embedding permanent, statewide regulatory structures where more targeted, locally adaptable solutions could suffice.
