According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), SB 66 is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on the state. Any potential administrative costs associated with implementing the provisions of the bill, such as updating statutory forms or revising procedures related to supported decision-making agreements, can be absorbed by state agencies using existing resources. This implies no additional appropriation or staffing needs are anticipated as a result of the bill’s enactment.

At the local level, the bill also carries no significant fiscal implications. While SB 66 may result in some increased use or awareness of supported decision-making as an alternative to guardianship, this shift is not expected to impose new costs on courts or county-level legal systems. In fact, over time, broader adoption of supported decision-making agreements could reduce the demand for guardianship proceedings, potentially resulting in cost savings for local governments.

In summary, SB 66 is designed to clarify and expand legal authority within an existing legal framework without requiring substantial new expenditures. Its focus on individual empowerment through voluntary agreements rather than court-mandated processes supports efficiency in both state and local government operations.

Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on SB 66 based on its clear alignment with core liberty principles and its targeted, non-burdensome expansion of rights for a vulnerable population. The bill amends the Texas Estates Code to formally allow adults with disabilities who use supported decision-making agreements (SDMAs) to receive assistance from their chosen supporter during legal proceedings. This includes criminal and civil court settings such as trials, hearings, and depositions—situations where decision-making stakes are often highest.

The bill reinforces the autonomy of individuals with disabilities by enabling them to voluntarily authorize a supporter to assist them in understanding and communicating legal decisions without transferring any actual decision-making power. It carefully balances individual liberty with personal responsibility, allowing people to maintain their legal agency while receiving the help they need to make informed choices. The statutory updates ensure consistency with the intended use of SDMAs and protect against abuse or undue influence by preserving consent-based structures and formalized duties for supporters.

Importantly, SB 66 accomplishes these goals without imposing significant fiscal or regulatory burdens. The Legislative Budget Board found no significant fiscal impact to state or local governments, and implementation can be managed with existing resources. The bill also does not grant additional rulemaking authority, nor does it create new government programs or bureaucratic processes, further aligning it with the principle of limited government.

Overall, SB 66 enhances legal protections and personal freedom for people with disabilities while upholding procedural integrity and fiscal restraint.

• Individual Liberty: The bill empowers adults with disabilities to maintain autonomy in legal matters by permitting them to use supporters during civil and criminal proceedings. These supporters help interpret, communicate, and understand the implications of legal decisions, without replacing or overriding the individual’s will. The bill affirms the person’s right to choose how they receive help, preserving legal capacity and freedom of choice.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill enables individuals with disabilities to take responsibility for their own decisions with appropriate assistance, rather than having those decisions made for them through guardianship. It encourages participation in critical life matters—like legal proceedings—by providing voluntary, consent-based support, reinforcing that people are capable of making decisions when given the right tools and support. 
• Free Enterprise: While the bill does not directly regulate economic markets, it may lower long-term costs for families and the courts by offering an alternative to guardianship. This could reduce legal expenses and promote broader workforce and financial participation by individuals with disabilities. In that sense, it supports the infrastructure that allows people to engage more freely in economic activity.
• Private Property Rights: The bill helps individuals with disabilities retain control over their legal and financial affairs with informed assistance, rather than surrendering those rights under guardianship. By preserving legal authority in the hands of the individual, SB 66 reinforces the principle that private property should remain under the voluntary control of its rightful owner, even when assistance is needed to exercise that control effectively.
• Limited Government: The bill avoids creating new bureaucracies, mandates, or enforcement mechanisms. Instead, it strengthens a voluntary alternative to court-ordered guardianship, which can be intrusive and costly. The bill promotes self-directed care and support by clarifying and extending the scope of supported decision-making while limiting the state’s role in personal legal affairs.