According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), SB 2180 is not expected to result in a significant fiscal impact to the State. While the legislation authorizes the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement (TCOLE) to create rules and administer a certification program for peace officers who conduct certain polygraph examinations, it is assumed that any administrative costs incurred by TCOLE to implement the bill could be absorbed within the agency’s existing resources​.

Similarly, the fiscal note finds no significant fiscal implication for local governments. This suggests that peace officer agencies at the local level—such as municipal or county law enforcement departments—would not face burdensome compliance costs, as the implementation timeline (with a January 1, 2027 deadline) provides flexibility to incorporate training and certification planning within existing training budgets or schedules.

In sum, from a fiscal perspective, SB 2180 is considered cost-neutral for both state and local governments. Its implementation would be achieved through reallocation or prioritization of existing funds rather than requiring new appropriations or imposing unfunded mandates. This fiscal neutrality could make the bill more favorable to lawmakers concerned about budget constraints or new state-imposed costs on local entities.

Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on SB 2180 but also strongly suggests amendments as described below. The bill takes a measured approach to improving the quality and consistency of polygraph examinations conducted by peace officers in Texas, particularly in preemployment screenings and criminal investigations. By establishing a certification process through the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement (TCOLE), the legislation helps ensure that officers administering these exams are properly trained and tested in investigative polygraphy. This increases professionalism and reduces the risk of misapplication in sensitive areas of public safety.

The Committee Substitute improves upon the originally filed bill by removing the requirement for peace officers to be certified to conduct post-conviction sex offender polygraph tests. That change narrows the bill’s scope and avoids regulatory duplication, as those post-conviction exams are already governed by a specialized oversight body—the Joint Polygraph Committee on Offender Testing. This targeted revision reflects thoughtful attention to jurisdictional boundaries and the functional roles of law enforcement versus treatment oversight.

While the bill promotes personal responsibility and supports improved standards, it does slightly expand government authority by introducing a new regulatory function within TCOLE. For this reason, a recommendation to amend is appropriate. Reasonable changes—such as including a sunset review, providing flexibility for third-party certification, or ensuring transparency in rulemaking—would help reinforce the principle of limited government while maintaining the bill’s integrity and objectives.

In sum, SB 2180 represents a constructive step toward professionalizing an important aspect of law enforcement operations. With minor but meaningful amendments, the bill would strike an even better balance between public safety, accountability, and restrained governance.

• Individual Liberty: The bill does not expand the use of polygraph testing, which can raise due process and privacy concerns. Instead, it enhances procedural integrity by ensuring that only properly trained officers may administer such tests. By minimizing the risk of unreliable or abusive use of polygraph exams—especially in preemployment or investigatory settings—it helps protect individuals from unjust outcomes, offering a mild positive impact on individual liberty.

• Personal Responsibility: The bill advances personal responsibility by requiring peace officers to undergo specialized training and pass a knowledge-based examination before conducting polygraph exams. This reinforces the idea that individuals entrusted with serious investigative tools must demonstrate competency and accountability. It encourages a culture of professional integrity within law enforcement.

• Free Enterprise: By placing exclusive certification authority with the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement (TCOLE), the bill could modestly constrain market competition. Although the certification applies only to public peace officers—not private examiners—it still centralizes control and limits potential pathways for innovation or flexibility. Allowing for third-party certifications could mitigate this concern and promote market diversity.

• Private Property Rights: The bill does not address, expand, or restrict any property rights. Its provisions are focused solely on procedural requirements for public law enforcement personnel.

• Limited Government: The bill expands TCOLE’s authority to regulate a new area—polygraph certification—introducing an additional layer of oversight. While this may be justified for ensuring professional standards, it does represent a growth in regulatory scope. That said, the bill’s narrow focus and fiscal neutrality suggest a restrained expansion. This impact could be made more liberty-aligned with amendments to ensure transparency, sunset review, or decentralized certification options.

• HB 4956 (Same As)