SJR 85 proposes a constitutional amendment to increase the additional school district property tax exemption for elderly and disabled homeowners from $10,000 to $60,000. While this measure is framed as compassionate tax relief for vulnerable populations, its fiscal and policy implications raise significant concerns. The exemption would result in substantial revenue losses for school districts, requiring the state to backfill those funds through increased financial aid—without imposing any accountability or efficiency measures on local entities. This dynamic undermines personal and institutional responsibility and reinforces a flawed fiscal structure that avoids addressing the systemic drivers of high property taxes.
From a liberty-focused policy perspective, SJR 85 creates a selective benefit for a politically favored class—elderly and disabled homeowners—at the expense of equity and fairness in the tax system. By narrowing the tax base and shifting the burden onto non-exempt groups, particularly younger, working Texans and small business owners, the amendment erodes broader economic liberty. This cost-shifting can intensify generational disparities and deepen economic pressures on those already struggling with housing affordability and inflation.
Furthermore, the measure expands the financial obligations of the state without enacting reforms to control spending or rationalize school funding. This violates the principle of limited government by increasing long-term state commitments without addressing the underlying inefficiencies in Texas’s tax and education finance systems. Instead of pursuing comprehensive tax reform or expenditure restraint, SJR 85 perpetuates a politically expedient approach that masks structural deficiencies with selective relief.
For these reasons, while the intent behind SJR 85 may be commendable, its approach is unsustainable and inequitable. It expands government obligations, distorts tax fairness, and fails to promote meaningful reform. Therefore, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on SJR 85.
- Individual Liberty: At face value, the resolution enhances individual liberty for elderly and disabled homeowners by lowering their property tax obligations, thereby helping them remain in their homes and maintain greater control over their financial choices. However, this benefit comes at a cost to others. By reducing the tax base and shifting the burden to non-exempt property owners—including younger families and small businesses—the measure indirectly restricts the financial freedom of those groups. True liberty requires fairness, and when relief for one group results in increased obligations for another, it undermines equitable liberty across the population.
- Personal Responsibility: The bill significantly weakens the principle of personal and institutional responsibility. It does this by requiring the state to fully compensate school districts for the lost revenue from the increased exemption without attaching any requirements for fiscal restraint or spending reform at the local level. This “hold harmless” provision allows school districts to operate without facing the consequences of tax base erosion, promoting a reliance on state subsidies rather than responsible, locally-driven budgeting.
- Free Enterprise: The resolution does not directly regulate business, but its economic ripple effects may negatively impact free enterprise. As the property tax burden shifts away from exempt homeowners, it falls more heavily on non-exempt groups—many of whom are entrepreneurs, new homeowners, or small business owners. These groups often operate on thinner margins and are more sensitive to rising costs. In this way, the bill’s selective tax relief may distort the economic environment, discouraging growth and investment, especially in communities with already high housing and operating costs.
- Private Property Rights: The resolution upholds the property rights of elderly and disabled Texans by mitigating tax pressures that could otherwise jeopardize their ability to remain in their homes. However, it does so selectively. Non-exempt homeowners may face relatively higher taxes or reduced services, meaning their property rights are indirectly compromised. A true defense of property rights should be uniform and not come at the expense of other groups’ financial or legal standing.
- Limited Government: This is where the resolution most clearly departs from liberty principles. The amendment obligates the state to assume a larger fiscal role by reimbursing school districts for forgone local tax revenue—potentially over $1.2 billion in the next biennium if enabling legislation like SB 23 passes. This grows the size and scope of state government without requiring efficiency gains or fiscal discipline in return. Rather than shrinking or reforming government, the bill entrenches a model of centralized, reactive fiscal policy that deepens long-term obligations and burdens future taxpayers.
