HB 4960 is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on the State of Texas. The Legislative Budget Board, referencing input from relevant state agencies, including the Texas Ethics Commission and the Office of Court Administration, reports that implementation of the bill would not require substantial new expenditures or resources. The agencies involved indicate that their existing infrastructure and personnel can accommodate the expanded regulatory scope and enforcement responsibilities created by the bill without incurring significant new costs​.

The bill does establish the potential for increased civil penalties—raising the maximum from $4,000 to $10,000 for certain violations of political advertising disclosure laws, and counting each non-compliant text message as a separate offense. However, the Comptroller of Public Accounts notes that because the number of potential violations and the amounts of actual penalties assessed are uncertain, it is not possible to estimate the revenue that might be generated from these fines. Therefore, while there is a possibility of increased revenue through enforcement, the fiscal note cautiously refrains from projecting a positive or negative revenue impact​.

Regarding local governments, the bill is not anticipated to impose additional financial burdens or require changes in local operations. The enforcement mechanisms and responsibilities primarily reside with state-level bodies like the Texas Ethics Commission, suggesting local fiscal neutrality. Overall, the bill’s fiscal implications are minimal and manageable within existing frameworks.

HB 4960 proposes to regulate political advertising disseminated via mass text message campaigns by expanding the definition of “political advertising” in the Texas Election Code and by significantly increasing civil penalties for noncompliance. While the bill aims to address a perceived gap in campaign transparency, it does so in a way that introduces serious concerns regarding free speech, overregulation, and government overreach.

At its core, HB 4960 dramatically increases the scope of government authority by granting the Texas Ethics Commission the ability to penalize each individual noncompliant text message with a civil fine of up to $10,000. This enforcement structure is not only unprecedented in its scale, but it also introduces an expansive interpretation of political speech regulation. Without clear limitations or exemptions, the bill risks capturing low-cost, volunteer-based political organizing—raising concerns about constitutionally protected First Amendment activity under both the U.S. and Texas Constitutions.

The bill’s definition of a “mass text message campaign” hinges on whether expenditures exceed “basic costs” of hardware, software, and bandwidth. This language is vague and may be inconsistently interpreted or enforced, particularly against small campaigns, local ballot measure efforts, or nonprofit advocacy groups without access to sophisticated legal compliance tools. These groups could face outsized liability for technical or minor violations, undermining the principle of equal treatment under the law and effectively chilling civic engagement by those with fewer resources.

From a limited government perspective, HB 4960 marks a concerning expansion. It increases the regulatory footprint of the state without providing safeguards to prevent selective enforcement, disproportionate punishment, or burdens on free enterprise. While it does not increase taxes or require new government appropriations, it nonetheless imposes new regulatory burdens on individuals, businesses, and political actors engaging in a protected form of speech. The fact that a campaign could unknowingly incur millions of dollars in fines for technical omissions on mass texts is illustrative of the bill’s lack of proportionality and due process safeguards.

Finally, although political text messages may be frustrating to voters, HB 4960 addresses the symptom—annoying messages—through punitive rather than principled means. There are less intrusive, more balanced solutions to consider, such as voter opt-in or opt-out systems, improvements in telecommunications regulations, or transparency guidelines that don’t involve aggressive enforcement mechanisms. For these reasons, and in defense of free political speech, due process, and limited, accountable government, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on HB 4960.

• Individual Liberty: The bill raises serious concerns for free speech protections. By defining each noncompliant political text as a separate violation and imposing penalties up to $10,000 per message, the legislation risks chilling political expression, especially for grassroots campaigns and individuals. While large political organizations may absorb the cost of compliance, ordinary citizens and small advocacy groups may be discouraged from engaging in text-based outreach due to the risk of severe financial penalties. This disproportionate consequence undermines the principle that individuals should be free to speak and participate in the political process without fear of excessive government punishment.
• Personal Responsibility: HB 4960 promotes personal responsibility in one respect by holding political advertisers accountable for disclosures in mass communications. However, it fails to reasonably distinguish between willful misconduct and technical or inadvertent violations. By treating each individual message as a separate offense, regardless of context, the bill veers away from principled enforcement and toward punitive overreach, failing to uphold a just or balanced sense of responsibility.
• Free Enterprise: The bill imposes new compliance burdens on text messaging vendors, political consultants, and small businesses involved in campaign communication. Vendors offering low-cost mass messaging services may face liability risk if clients misuse the platform. This regulatory expansion raises the cost of market entry and could reduce innovation or competition in political technology services, disadvantaging smaller businesses and reinforcing the market power of large, well-funded firms.
• Private Property Rights: HB 4960 does not directly affect physical or economic property rights. However, it does impose a regulatory framework over private digital infrastructure used to communicate political ideas, which could be interpreted as an indirect limitation on how individuals and groups use their digital property (e.g., software, messaging platforms) for expressive purposes.
• Limited Government: By expanding the scope of the Texas Ethics Commission’s authority and creating a per-message penalty structure, the bill represents a significant expansion of administrative enforcement in the realm of political communication. The government would be empowered to assess potentially massive civil fines based on vague statutory thresholds (e.g., what constitutes “basic” costs). This runs counter to the principle of restrained government power, particularly where speech and civic participation are concerned.

• HB 2285 (Same As)
• SB 880 (Same As)