WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 13

Relating to the use by a political subdivision of public funds for lobbying activities.

89th Legislature, 2nd Called Session (2025) Introduced by Paul Bettencourt and 13 co-sponsors

SB 13 prohibits Texas local governments from spending public funds to directly lobby state officials, restricting taxpayer-funded advocacy efforts by cities, counties, and school districts.

Referred to State Affairs
#attorney'sfees(s0202) #charitable&nonprofitorganizations(i0055) #countygovernment--employees/officers(i0095) #countygovernment--finance(i0097) #ethics(i0345) #lobbyists&lobbying(s3141) #legislature(i0520) #politicalsubdivisions(i0588)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 13

Legislative bill overview

SB 13 restricts Texas political subdivisions (cities, counties, school districts, etc.) from using public funds to directly lobby the state legislature or executive branch. The bill likely establishes prohibitions, penalties, or disclosure requirements around lobbying expenditures by local government entities using taxpayer money.

Why is this important

This addresses a fundamental accountability question: whether taxpayers should fund efforts by local governments to influence state policy decisions that may conflict with broader public interests. The issue affects how local governments allocate budgets and their ability to advocate for local priorities at the state level, potentially impacting resource distribution between local and state governments.

Potential points of contention

  • Local advocacy impact: Cities and counties argue they need to lobby the state on funding formulas, regulatory burdens, and policy decisions directly affecting their constituents; restrictions could disadvantage smaller jurisdictions with limited resources to comply with new rules
  • Definition and enforcement challenges: Distinguishing between legitimate government communication/testimony and prohibited "lobbying" is legally complex; ambiguous definitions could chill lawful government speech or create compliance burden
  • Transparency vs. restriction trade-off: Some may prefer disclosure requirements over outright bans, arguing transparency without restriction better serves accountability while preserving local voice in state policy

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.