According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), SB 1325 is expected to have no significant fiscal implication to the state. The bill authorizes, but does not require, public school districts, open-enrollment charter schools, and private schools to contract with vendors for respiratory distress medication and training services. Since participation is entirely voluntary, and no mandates or state-provided funding accompany the bill, the associated costs are expected to be minimal and absorbed within existing resources at the agency level​.

The Texas Department of State Health Services and the Texas Education Agency—two key agencies mentioned in the fiscal analysis—are not anticipated to require additional appropriations to fulfill any duties potentially associated with the bill’s implementation. The legislation does not obligate these agencies to develop or administer the contracts or training programs, further limiting any operational or financial burden on state infrastructure.

Similarly, the bill is not expected to create a significant fiscal impact on local governments, including school districts. Since the ability to enter into contracts is permissive and not compulsory, schools will decide whether to allocate their existing budgets toward such services based on their needs and available resources. This structure preserves local financial discretion and avoids imposing unfunded mandates.

In summary, SB 1325 facilitates access to health resources in schools without introducing new costs to the state or local entities, making it a fiscally neutral measure under current projections.

SB 1325 proposes a straightforward and voluntary policy allowing Texas public and private schools to contract with vendors for both medication used to treat respiratory distress and for related training of school personnel and volunteers. The bill aims to strengthen emergency medical readiness in schools without introducing any mandates or burdensome regulations. It supports schools in addressing sudden respiratory events—such as asthma attacks or other distress incidents—where immediate intervention can save lives.

The bill analysis emphasizes that existing law already allows schools to maintain and administer epinephrine auto-injectors, but not all respiratory emergencies are allergic in nature. SB 1325 seeks to close this gap by empowering schools to access additional, non-patient-specific medication and training on a voluntary basis. Importantly, this authorization is permissive, leaving full discretion to local school boards and private school governing bodies to decide whether to engage such services. There is no state mandate and no requirement for schools to participate or report to state agencies, ensuring that this remains a locally driven option.

The bill is highly consistent with core liberty principles. It respects individual liberty by ensuring children’s access to emergency care options and promotes personal responsibility by empowering school staff and volunteers with appropriate training. By enabling free enterprise participation through private vendor contracting, the bill invites innovation and cost-efficiency in the school health space. Additionally, it aligns with limited government values—there is no creation of new bureaucracy, funding burden, or regulation, and schools retain full autonomy in whether or how to implement this tool.

As such, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on SB 1325.

• Individual Liberty: The bill enhances student safety by authorizing schools to contract for medication and training to respond to respiratory distress—potentially life-threatening emergencies that require immediate action. By improving schools’ capacity to address such incidents, it protects students’ right to life and bodily autonomy in situations where they may not be able to advocate for themselves. Importantly, this is done through non-mandated, local decision-making, allowing schools and families to retain choice and autonomy over how emergency medical preparedness is handled.

• Personal Responsibility: The bill supports the principle that individuals and institutions should proactively plan for emergencies. It empowers school personnel and volunteers with training to administer medication responsibly during health crises. While participation is optional, the bill encourages schools to take responsibility for creating a safe environment for students with known or unknown respiratory risks—without waiting for state mandates.

• Free Enterprise: The bill explicitly authorizes contracts with private vendors, thereby opening the door for market-based solutions in school health preparedness. It encourages competition, innovation, and private sector involvement in providing both medical supplies and training. Rather than imposing government-run programs or one-size-fits-all procurement rules, the bill allows each school to choose providers that meet their specific needs and budgets.

• Private Property Rights: This bill does not affect private property rights directly. It deals with school operations and public health preparedness. However, to the extent that it relies on voluntary contracts and does not impose regulations on private vendors or school facilities, it avoids infringing on this principle.

• Limited Government: Perhaps most significantly, the bill adheres to the principle of limited government. It does not mandate participation, create new regulatory burdens, or require state funding. Schools can choose whether or not to engage in these contracts based on their unique local needs. The state’s role is merely permissive—it authorizes a legal option without enforcing its use or expanding bureaucracy.

• HB 2995 (Same As)