According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), HB 118 has no significant fiscal implications for the state. The LBB assumes that any costs incurred from implementing the provisions of this bill could be absorbed using existing resources within the involved agencies.

The committee created by the bill is designed to serve an advisory and informational role, with responsibilities that include analyzing security vulnerabilities, assessing threats to critical infrastructure, and offering policy recommendations. Because the committee does not carry enforcement powers or require new staffing mandates, its financial footprint is expected to remain minimal.

Likewise, the bill is projected to have no significant fiscal impact on local governments. While the committee may interface with local entities and request data or collaboration, it does not impose unfunded mandates or regulatory burdens on municipalities or counties.

In summary, the Legislative Budget Board has determined that the operational costs of the advisory committee can be managed through current agency budgets, and no new appropriations or funding allocations are required for implementation. This fiscal neutrality strengthens the bill’s viability, especially in a budget-conscious legislative environment.

House Bill 118 proposes the creation of the Texas Advisory Committee on Geopolitical Conflict. This measure reflects a strategic, policy-driven approach to evaluating and preparing for risks that could arise from global geopolitical instability. As amended, HB 118 offers a balanced structure that supports state readiness while aligning with foundational principles such as limited government, accountability, and public transparency.

The committee’s scope is intentionally constrained to an advisory role. It is tasked with developing preparedness strategies, conducting assessments of critical infrastructure and supply chains, and providing recommendations to the Governor. The substitute version notably removed provisions found in other legislative iterations (e.g., SB 2312), such as subpoena authority, sweeping confidentiality protections, and the absence of a sunset date. By contrast, HB 118 includes a defined expiration date (September 1, 2029), limits investigatory powers, and ensures that public reports are only withheld when their release could reasonably jeopardize state or national security.

From a fiscal standpoint, the Legislative Budget Board (LBB) has determined that the bill has no significant fiscal impact on the state or local governments. The anticipated costs associated with the advisory committee's work can be absorbed within existing appropriations and agency resources. This restrained fiscal footprint enhances the bill’s appeal as a cost-effective preparedness measure.

In addition, the bill’s emphasis on foresight and resilience complements broader national security objectives while avoiding the creation of new permanent regulatory bodies. By requiring collaboration with key agencies such as the Texas National Guard, Department of State Health Services, and the Health and Human Services Commission, the advisory committee integrates existing institutional knowledge rather than duplicating functions or establishing operational enforcement authority.

In comparison to similar proposals, HB 118 makes meaningful improvements in terms of oversight, transparency, and scope. It restricts the committee’s function to information-gathering and policy guidance without infringing on civil liberties or overstepping constitutional boundaries. The committee’s outputs are non-binding and serve as tools for executive preparedness, not mandates for procurement or enforcement.

In summary, HB 118, as substituted, strikes a responsible balance between improving Texas’s strategic posture and maintaining fidelity to the principles of accountable governance. It avoids the pitfalls of government overreach seen in prior drafts or related bills and deserves support as a measured, time-limited mechanism to enhance state resilience in an increasingly unpredictable global environment.

As such, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on HB 118.

• Individual Liberty: The bill does not impose new regulations, surveillance, or constraints on individuals. It is focused exclusively on advisory functions related to strategic preparedness. There is no direct infringement on personal freedoms, and the removal of subpoena powers and blanket confidentiality protections (which were present in earlier versions or similar bills like SB 2312) helps protect civil liberties. By ensuring that any security-oriented recommendations come from a publicly accountable body rather than an opaque authority, the bill appropriately balances national security with individual rights.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill encourages proactive planning and preparation by state leadership, which can be seen as reinforcing the broader culture of responsibility. Although the bill centralizes strategic preparedness within a state-appointed advisory body, it does so to support, not replace, localized or individual emergency readiness. While the bill could go further in directly promoting decentralized, community-level resilience, it does not displace or discourage it either.
• Free Enterprise: The bill charges the advisory committee with evaluating “critical procurements” and vulnerabilities in supply chains, including drugs and industrial inputs. While these evaluations may inform future procurement policies, the committee lacks enforcement authority, and no restrictions on market participation are imposed in the bill itself. That said, caution is warranted in future implementation: recommendations from the committee should be accompanied by economic impact assessments to avoid unintended market distortions or implicit blacklisting of certain vendors based on geopolitical affiliations.
• Private Property Rights: The bill does not authorize inspections of or direct engagement with private infrastructure without consent. Though it discusses threats to “critical infrastructure,” including privately owned assets such as energy, communications, and water systems, the advisory role limits any risk of property interference. There are no takings, regulatory penalties, or mandates placed on property owners. Any potential influence over private operations would result only from future policy debates and not from direct action under this bill.
• Limited Government: This is perhaps the most significantly improved area relative to earlier or parallel proposals like SB 2312. HB 118 limits the advisory committee to research and recommendations. It includes a sunset clause (September 1, 2029), providing an automatic expiration unless the Legislature acts to renew it. The bill contains no rulemaking authority, regulatory enforcement, or budget expansion, and it mandates that all costs be absorbed within existing resources. These provisions reflect a cautious approach that respects the boundaries of state power while enabling prudent foresight.

• SB 1348 (Same As)
• SB 2312 (Similar To)