According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), SB 1026 would have no significant fiscal implication to the State as a result of the bill. The assumption is that any additional costs incurred by the Office of the Attorney General in implementing the mandatory prosecution of election law offenses could be absorbed with existing agency resources. This suggests that no new funding, staffing, or infrastructure would be necessary at the state level to enforce the provisions of the bill.

Regarding the impact on the state correctional system, the fiscal analysis anticipates no significant change in prison populations or demand for correctional resources. This implies that while the bill may lead to more prosecutions, the volume or severity of offenses involved is not expected to significantly burden the state’s incarceration system.

At the local level, the fiscal note likewise concludes that there would be no significant fiscal impact on units of local government. This may reflect that while the bill alters the balance of prosecutorial responsibility, it does not impose new mandates or costs on local prosecutors or law enforcement agencies beyond the duty to submit reports to the Attorney General.

In summary, SB 1026 is fiscally neutral, with minimal or no anticipated additional costs to state or local entities under its current implementation assumptions.

SB 1026 proposes a critical adjustment to Texas election law enforcement by mandating that the Attorney General prosecute election-related criminal offenses if local prosecutors fail to initiate proceedings within six months of receiving a probable cause report. This legislative response directly addresses the Stephens ruling by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which concluded that current law does not grant the Attorney General independent prosecutorial authority. By changing the statutory language from permissive to mandatory, SB 1026 closes a legal loophole and establishes a clear and consistent enforcement mechanism across the state.

This bill promotes key liberty principles, particularly individual liberty and personal responsibility. Election integrity is fundamental to the right of every citizen to have their vote count, and this measure ensures that credible allegations of election crimes are not disregarded due to political reluctance or prosecutorial discretion at the local level. By holding individuals accountable for violations of election law, the bill reinforces the idea that unlawful actions must have consequences, thereby strengthening public trust in democratic institutions.

Although the bill centralizes enforcement authority under specific conditions, it does not represent an unchecked expansion of state power. It introduces a narrowly tailored solution that balances local prosecutorial autonomy with the state’s interest in upholding uniform election standards. Furthermore, the fiscal note confirms that any associated costs can be absorbed with existing resources, meaning the bill does not place undue burden on taxpayers or expand the size of government.

For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on SB 1026. It supports core principles of liberty, ensures enforcement consistency, and responsibly addresses a judicial gap without creating new bureaucratic structures or fiscal impact.

• HB 4957 (Same As)
• HB 5138 (Same As)