WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 167

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

89th Legislature, 2nd Called Session (2025) Introduced by Daniel Alders and 70 co-sponsors

HB 167 establishes restrictions on Texas political subdivisions' use of public funds for lobbying, affecting local governments' ability to advocate for their interests.

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 · HB 167

Legislative bill overview

HB 167 regulates how Texas political subdivisions (cities, counties, school districts, etc.) can use public funds for lobbying activities. The bill establishes restrictions and requirements for local governments engaging in advocacy efforts at the state or federal level, likely including disclosure, approval, or spending limitations on lobbying expenditures.

Why is this important

Political subdivisions spend taxpayer money on lobbyists and advocacy campaigns, which raises questions about whether public funds should support partisan or specialized interests. This bill directly affects how local governments can engage in the legislative process and could significantly impact their ability to advocate for local priorities—from education funding to infrastructure needs.

Potential points of contention

  • Defining "lobbying": Disagreement over what activities count as lobbying (direct advocacy vs. public awareness campaigns) could make enforcement unclear
  • Local autonomy vs. state control: Cities and counties may argue they need funding flexibility to protect local interests; state legislators may want to restrict potentially wasteful spending
  • Transparency vs. competitive disadvantage: Requiring disclosure of lobbying activities could expose local government negotiating positions while creating administrative burdens
  • Partisan implications: Opponents may argue the bill targets certain types of advocacy or favors subdivisions with particular policy positions

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

Sign in to ask a question.