Overall Vote Recommendation
No
Principle Criteria
Free Enterprise
Property Rights
Personal Responsibility
Limited Government
Individual Liberty
Digest
HB 4936 tasks the Texas Economic Development and Tourism Office with conducting a comprehensive study to evaluate the total marketing-related expenditures across all Texas state agencies. The bill defines key terms such as “state agency,” encompassing a wide range of executive branch entities including departments, commissions, and public higher education institutions. The study will assess both the cost of marketing efforts and the feasibility of consolidating these functions into a new centralized body known as the Department of Marketing Services.
The scope of the study must include a detailed analysis of marketing expenditures for each agency, an estimate of the number and compensation of full-time equivalent employees needed to staff a potential Department of Marketing Services, and the overall operational costs associated with establishing and maintaining such a department. The intent is to determine whether consolidating marketing review and approval within a single state entity could result in greater fiscal oversight or efficiency.
The bill requires the Texas Economic Development and Tourism Office to submit a report of its findings to the governor, lieutenant governor, speaker of the House, and all members of the legislature by September 30, 2026. HB 4936 contains a sunset provision, specifying that the legislation will expire on September 1, 2027, effectively making this a time-limited initiative focused solely on analysis and recommendation.
In its originally filed form, HB 4936 proposed the immediate creation of a new state agency, the Department of Marketing Services. This agency would be established under Chapter 2178 of the Government Code, complete with a governing board of seven gubernatorial appointees, staggered six-year terms, training requirements, rulemaking authority, and broad oversight powers. Its core function would be to approve or disapprove any proposed marketing expenditures by state agencies, effectively centralizing all state marketing decisions. The bill also authorized the department to compel state agencies to submit reports detailing their marketing expenditures and related impacts, suggesting a robust regulatory role.
By contrast, the Committee Substitute takes a more limited and exploratory approach. Rather than establishing a new department, it directs the Texas Economic Development and Tourism Office to conduct a study on current agency marketing costs and the feasibility of creating a centralized marketing oversight body in the future. This version does not create a new agency, establish a governing board, or impose immediate regulatory authority. It simply mandates a report, due by September 30, 2026, after which the act will expire in 2027 unless renewed.
In summary, the originally filed bill was a direct and immediate expansion of state oversight through the formation of a new regulatory agency, whereas the substitute version defers such action pending further study. This shift reflects a legislative pivot from bureaucratic creation to cautious analysis, likely in response to concerns about government growth and efficiency. Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on HB 4936.
- Individual Liberty: The bill does not directly restrict or advance personal freedoms. However, by enabling the potential creation of a centralized Department of Marketing Services, it introduces the risk of greater bureaucratic oversight that could—down the line—impact the autonomy of individual agencies, institutions, or public messaging. Any such centralization of decision-making authority could, over time, contribute to a narrowing of institutional discretion and possibly even chilling effects on public information campaigns. While indirect, this risk should not be ignored when evaluating long-term effects on liberty.
- Personal Responsibility: This bill does not impose obligations or remove responsibilities from individuals. It is narrowly focused on internal state operations. However, one could argue that taxpayer-funded marketing efforts often seek to influence behavior—encouraging or discouraging certain actions—which can tread into territory where government messaging begins to substitute for individual judgment and accountability. While HB 4936 only studies these functions, endorsing them by implication may reflect an underlying policy posture that sees people as subjects to be guided, rather than autonomous actors to be respected.
- Free Enterprise: One of the most notable implications lies here. If the study results in the creation of a Department of Marketing Services, that entity could standardize or restrict how agencies contract with private-sector marketing firms, thereby reducing competition and innovation in a dynamic market. Even the study alone could signal to the private sector that government intends to tighten control over marketing procurement, potentially chilling public-private partnerships or limiting entrepreneurial opportunities for smaller firms.
- Private Property Rights: There is no direct bearing on property rights under this bill. It does not regulate land, assets, or ownership. However, if the future department exerts influence over messaging that pertains to regulatory enforcement or outreach (such as campaigns tied to environmental or land use policy), there could be indirect downstream effects. Still, as written, this bill does not touch private property.
- Limited Government: This is where the bill most clearly conflicts with liberty principles. Even though it does not create a new department outright, the bill legitimizes and explores the expansion of government scope into marketing—a domain many would argue should not be part of the state’s core mission. The study itself, while temporary and fiscally limited, can function as a policy endorsement that facilitates future bureaucratic growth. It reflects a preference for centralization over decentralization, and for bureaucratic oversight over institutional autonomy.
Author
Pat Curry
Giovanni Capriglione
Ana-Maria Ramos
Tony Tinderholt
David Cook
Contact the Author
Rep. Pat Curry
Capitol Phone:
(512) 463-0135
Capitol Office:
EXT E1.512
E-Mail:
