Today the US Supreme Court again decided to be a legislature. Four judges decided that abortions do not need to be at medically safe clinics. And that abortion doctors don’t need to be qualified to practice at local hospitals. I am not sure where we go next, but I assure you that I will continue to fight for unborn babies and for the health and safety of women.
Burnett: In 2015, you co-authored a bill preventing municipalities from banning fracking. Why did you feel this bill was needed?
King: Oil and gas deposits don’t stop at city limits. One of our largest natural-gas-producing counties has by itself over 30 municipalities. A patchwork of inconsistent municipal regulations would undermine Texas’ preeminent role in regulating oil and gas development. Furthermore, few cities, if any, have the in-house expertise [needed] to regulate drilling and production. That is not to say cities don’t have a role. Our legislation affirmed a municipality’s authority to regulate aboveground activity, including fire and emergency response, traffic, lights, noise, and reasonable setbacks. Bottom line: Texas must have consistent statewide regulations so natural resources can be developed safely, while protecting the environment, and also in a way that balances legitimate municipal interests with a property owner’s right to develop his or her estate.
Burnett: Texas is one of 27 states challenging the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan in court. Do you support Texas’ suit, and, if you do, why do you support it?
King: I support Texas’ lawsuit challenging the so-called Clean Power Plan. [This Environmental Protection Agency] regulation is an unprecedented expansion of federal executive power far exceeding the EPA’s authority under Section 111(d) or any other provision of the Clean Air Act. If implemented, the result will be substantially higher priced electricity for homeowners and businesses, along with reduced reliability. The financial impact on low-income families alone is untenable. EPA’s plan also treads heavily on state sovereignty, particularly in Texas, where the majority of our electric grid is independent from the [Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s] jurisdiction.
In light of the recent stay issued by the U.S. Supreme Court on the CPP, legislatures and governors should unite across the country to suspend state planning activities until such time as the next president is elected and the new administration’s intent with regard to the CPP is known.
Burnett: Many federal regulations seem to have an especially disparate impact on Texas. What can the legislature do to limit the impact federal rules have on Texas businesses and residents?
King: To say federal rules have a disparate impact on Texas is an understatement. No one ever thought, for example, the Clean Air Act [of 1970], the Endangered Species Act [of 1973], or the Clean Water Act [of 1972] could be so brazenly expanded by federal agencies. Our legislature must adequately fund litigation challenging such abuse, and we have to work closely with our congressional counterparts to rein in the federal agencies. Although we look for opportunities beyond this, options are frustratingly limited.
H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D. ([email protected]) is a research fellow with The Heartland Institute.
Full Publication: http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2016/03/24/legislative-pulse-texas-state-rep-phil-king-fights-fracking-and-against
Early Voting Hours & Locations for Parker and Wise Counties
Tuesday, February 16 – Friday, February 26
Parker County
LOCATIONS:
Parker County Annex 1112 Santa Fe Dr.
Springtown Municipal Court Annex 200 N Main St.
Peaster Fire Department 221 Judd St.
Aledo ISD Admin Building 1008 Bailey Ranch Rd.
Azle Masonic Lodge 257 W Main St.
Willow Park Municipal Building 516 Ranch House Rd.
Old Brock ISD Admin Building 100 Grindstone Rd.
DAYS AND HOURS:
Tuesday, February 16: 8:00-5:00pm
Wednesday, February 17: 8:00-5:00pm
Thursday, February 18: 8:00-5:00pm
Friday, February 19: 8:00-5:00pm
Saturday, February 20: 7:00-7:00pm
Sunday, February 21: 11:00-4:00pm
Monday, February 22: 7:00-7:00pm
Tuesday, February 23: 7:00-7:00pm
Wednesday, February 24: 7:00-7:00pm
Thursday, February 25: 7:00-7:00pm
Friday, February 26: 7:00-7:00pm
To view a sample ballot for Parker County, click HERE.
Wise County
LOCATIONS:
Decatur Elections Office 200 S Trinity St.
Rhome City Hall 105 1st St.
Bridgeport Law Enforcement Center 1000 Thompson St.
DAYS AND HOURS:
Tuesday, February 16: 7:00 am – 7:00 pm
Wednesday, February 17: 8:00 – 5:00 pm
Thursday, February 18: 8:00 – 5:00 pm
Friday, February 19: 8:00 – 5:00 am
Saturday, February 20: 8:00 am – 5:00 pm
Closed Sunday
Monday, February 22: 8:00 am – 5:00 pm
Tuesday, February 23: 7:00 am – 7:00 pm
Wednesday, February 24: 8:00- 5:00 pm
Thursday, February 25: 8:00 – 5:00 pm
Friday, February 26: 8:00 – 5:00 pm
To view a sample ballot for Wise County, click HERE.
Texas’ tradition of leading the way in state-level exchange and relations with Israel extends back generations. Texas’ bilateral trade with Israel now exceeds half a billion dollars per year. Over the years we have lead trade missions, signed compacts and engaged in mutual development projects.
Unfortunately, a campaign has emerged that seeks to delegitimize our ally Israel and attack her through economic warfare. Leading groups, such as the Israel Allies Foundation, have documented this campaign, known as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, and have revealed that it is largely driven by anti-Jewish bigotry. This BDS movement seeks to discriminate against Israelis and those who do business in Israel.
As you already know, Texas was one of the first states in the country to pursue Iran divestment legislation. Unfortunately, the Iran Nuclear deal placed before Congress and the American people was a bad deal. Our position on this matter has not changed. Texas must never permit its funds to be invested in state sponsors of terror who seek the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons and ballistic missile technology.
Texas will not tolerate national-origin discrimination against Israel, which is precisely what BDS is. Efforts to inflict economic harm upon Texas’ trading partners weaken our state’s ability to conduct trade, and harm our vital social interests. BDS is not only Israel’s problem, its Texas’ problem as well.
I am hopeful that Texas will join other states around the country in protecting our economy, our taxpayer dollars and our great ally Israel from national origin discrimination. As a member of your state legislature I intend to file anti-BDS legislation in Texas at the earliest possible date. I chair the House committee on State and Federal Power and Responsibility and plan for the committee to make this issue a priority. Our state government should not enter into contracts with parties that engage in national origin discrimination against Israel, nor should we allow your tax dollars to be invested in them.
I am here to ask for your support. We the citizens must speak out and make our demands impossible to ignore. Whether it’s standing up for America and Israel in Washington DC, in Austin or in our own local communities, the future rests in our hands with God’s help.
Last week we had yet another very successful conference of the American Legislative Exchange Council where I have been serving as the National Chairman. ALEC in its 43rd year is where conservative policy makers and job creators come together to identify best practices and innovative policy for state governments. Nearly one-quarter of our country’s state legislators are members serving alongside companies that provide over 30 million jobs.
This week we heard from presidential candidate and neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson. His full speech can be viewed online HERE. (Carson speech begins at 33:32)
ALEC 2015 SNPS Meeting Award for ALEC National Chairman Phil King
We also heard from Mr. Mark Meckler and former U.S. Senator Tom Coburn discussing an Article V Convention of States. The Convention of States has organized over one million volunteers in the nation that are concerned with the tremendous amount of overreach from our federal government. It was indeed the states that created the federal government. For more information about the the Convention of States Project and how you can get involved, click HERE.
On November 3, you will have an opportunity to vote on seven different constitutional amendments. These amendments were all proposed as legislation during the 84th legislative session and vetted through the legislative process like all other bills. However, when amending the Texas Constitution, an amendment not only has a higher threshold of passage during the legislative process but it also requires voter approval before it becomes law.
In this post you will find the ballot language for each proposed amendment along with a synopsis of what supporters and opponents are saying and my recommendation. I hope this provides a good overview. You can learn more about the amendments at www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/.
In person early voting runs Monday, October 19th through Friday, October 30th. Election day is Tuesday, November 3rd. See you at the polls!
“The constitutional amendment increasing the amount of the residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation for public school purposes from $15,000 to $25,000, providing for a reduction of the limitation on the total amount of ad valorem taxes that may be imposed for those purposes on the homestead of an elderly or disabled person to reflect the increased exemption amount, authorizing the legislature to prohibit a political subdivision that has adopted an optional residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation from reducing the amount of or repealing the exemption, and prohibiting the enactment of a law that imposes a transfer tax on a transaction that conveys fee simple title to real property.”
DIGEST: Proposition 1 would increase the mandatory homestead exemption from $15,000 to $25,000. The taxable value of homesteads owned by the elderly or people who are disabled also would be correspondingly reduced. These provisions would take effect January 1, 2015, and would apply only to a tax year beginning on or after that date.
SUPPORTERS SAY: The property tax is one of the most onerous taxes. In areas of rapid economic growth where demand for housing is strong, homeowners, especially those living on fixed incomes, may be priced out of their homes by rising property taxes. The amount of the mandatory school district residence homestead exemption has not been updated since 1997, while appraisals have continued to increase. This amendment provides much needed tax relief by increasing the amount of the homestead exemption, reducing the amount of taxes paid by a homeowner. By making this effective for 2015 taxes, it ensures that relief is felt immediately. It also promotes economic growth by allowing homeowners to retain more of their money.
OPPONENTS SAY: The homestead exemption increase will only nominally provide property tax relief for homeowners. The exemption will reduce property taxes for the average homeowner by about $126 a year. The homestead exemption increase provides no benefit for those who rent homes. Property taxes are a local matter. The best way to control local property taxes is for voters to hold local officials accountable.
MY RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT
“The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of a 100 percent or totally disabled veteran who died before the law authorizing a residence homestead exemption for such a veteran took effect.”
DIGEST: Proposition 2 would extend the current homestead property tax exemption that applies to the surviving spouse of a totally disabled veteran who died on or after January 1, 2010, to include the surviving spouse of a totally disabled veteran who: 1) died before January 1, 2010; and 2) would have qualified for the full exemption on the homestead’s entire value if it had been available to totally disabled veterans at that time. A surviving spouse who otherwise qualified would be entitled to an exemption of the same portion of the market value of the same property to which the disabled veteran’s exemption would have applied.
SUPPORTERS SAY: This will provide a valuable form of tax relief for families of deceased disabled veterans. Any fiscal impact on a single taxing district would be minimal. Current law unintentionally creates two classes of surviving spouses and treats them differently depending on when their spouses died. This amendment recognizes the sacrifice by a 100 percent or totally disabled veteran and the person’s surviving spouse as the same regardless of the date on which the disabled veteran died.
OPPONENTS SAY: The Legislative Budget Board’s fiscal note indicates that school districts, municipalities, counties, and other special taxing districts (such as hospitals) will lose some tax revenue under the enactment of this proposition.
MY RECOMMENDATION:SUPPORT
“The constitutional amendment repealing the requirement that state officers elected by voters statewide reside in the state capital.”
DIGEST: Currently certain state officers elected by the voters statewide, including the comptroller of public accounts, commissioner of the General Land Office, attorney general, commissioner of agriculture, and railroad commissioners, are to reside in Austin, at the state capital, while in office. Proposition 3 removes the residency requirement. The residence of the governor is not affected by this proposed amendment.
SUPPORTERS SAY: Current law requires all statewide officials to move to Travis County when they take office. The capital residency requirement was included in the 1875 Texas Constitution when state officers traveled to the state capital by train, horse and buggy. Some state officers would simply like the freedom to live in a neighboring county to Travis for selection of a preferred school district or similar local preference. Others wish to retain their residence in their home county commuting home on weekends.
OPPONENTS SAY: This amendment would allow state officers, who are serving in full-time paid positions, to be physically present at the state capital infrequently and to possibly neglect their duties of office. State officers serve as the chief operating officers for their respective agencies, which have central offices in Austin, and the officers’ duties require the officers to be available to the agency employees serving in Austin. State officers are often required to conduct statewide business at the seat of government, and residency in a location other than Austin may likely increase the state-reimbursed travel expenses of the officers.
MY RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT
“The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit professional sports team charitable foundations to conduct charitable raffles.”
DIGEST: This proposition authorizes the legislature to permit professional sports team charitable foundations to conduct charitable raffles under the terms and conditions imposed by the law and to use raffle proceeds to pay reasonable advertising, promotional, and administrative expenses. The Texas Constitution as originally adopted prohibited all lotteries and gift enterprises in the state and has been interpreted to prohibit the state from authorizing most forms of gambling.
SUPPORTERS SAY: Would allow professional sports team charitable foundations to highlight the team’s philanthropic activities, bring awareness to community needs, encourage sports fans to contribute to worthy causes, and raise additional funds for the foundation’s charitable purposes. Under current law, nonprofit organizations may annually conduct not more than two charitable raffles. This amendment merely increases the number of raffles charitable foundations may conduct and authorizes cash payments.
OPPONENTS SAY: No comments opposing the proposed amendment were made throughout the legislative process. A review of other sources, however, indicates that gambling opponents, while not necessarily opposed to charitable raffles, are concerned that this will expand gambling in this state and encourage future expansions.
MY RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT
“The constitutional amendment to authorize counties with a population of 7,500 or less to perform private road construction and maintenance.”
DIGEST: This proposition proposes an increase from 5,000 to 7,500 for the maximum population threshold of a county that may construct and maintain private roads if the county imposes a reasonable charge for the work.
SUPPORTERS SAY: This increase in the constitution should be updated to reflect the population growth we have seen in rural counties since this threshold was originally placed in the Texas Constitution in 1980. This amendment will give rural counties and private landowners more flexibility to update private roads that are poorly maintained. These poorly maintained roads create public safety hazards for citizens and emergency services.
OPPONENTS SAY: Instead of increasing the maximum population threshold for counties allowed to perform private roadwork, the population limit should be eliminated. All counties in the state should have the option to construct and maintain private roads in the county as long as private landowners agree and pay the county for the cost of the work.
MY RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT
“The constitutional amendment recognizing the right of the people to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife subject to laws that promote wildlife conservation.”
DIGEST: Proposition 6 creates a new right for people to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife and establishes hunting and fishing as preferred methods of managing and controlling wildlife. This amendment does not affect laws or regulations that relate to trespass, property rights, eminent domain, or the municipal regulation of the discharge of a weapon in a populated area in the interest of public safety.
SUPPORTERS SAY: Supporters of the amendment feel that animal rights groups and antihunting activists may try to impose stricter limits on hunting and fishing in this state, and therefore seek constitutional protection for those activities as a preventative measure to preserve the opportunity to hunt and fish for future generations. This also protects the economic benefit enjoyed by the state from revenue generated from these activities.
OPPONENTS SAY: Opponents of the amendment feel that the amendment is unnecessary because there is no threat to hunting and fishing in this state. Efforts to enact the amendment as a preventative measure may in fact spur groups opposed to hunting and fishing to begin activity in response. A constitutionally stated preference of control may force regulations to change in a way that would make it more difficult to achieve a balanced ecosystem when other methods of control may be more appropriate in certain circumstances.
MY RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT
“The constitutional amendment dedicating certain sales and use tax revenue and motor vehicle sales, use, and rental tax revenue to the state highway fund to provide funding for nontolled roads and the reduction of certain transportation- related debt.”
DIGEST: Directs the Texas Comptroller to annually deposit to the state highway fund, in each fiscal year beginning with 2018, $2.5 billion of state sales tax revenue that exceeds the first $28 billion of those taxes collected during the year, and, in each fiscal year beginning with the 2020 fiscal year, 35 percent of the state motor vehicle sales, use, and rental tax revenue that exceeds the first $5 billion of those taxes collected during the fiscal year. This dedicated revenue will be deposited directly to the state highway fund for constructing, maintaining, acquiring right-of-ways for public roadways other than toll roads and for paying certain transportation- related bond debt.
SUPPORTERS SAY: The proposed amendment would provide a consistent and reliable source of funding for transportation projects in the state. The current system is inefficient and in poor repair in many areas, which has a negative effect on the state’s economy. A dedicated revenue source allows for future planning, addressing the state’s infrastructure demands. Under this amendment, existing projects can be completed and new projects can be planned up to 10 years in advance and started in areas that will lead to the greatest return on the state’s monetary investment.
OPPONENTS SAY: The proposed amendment is not the best method to address our transportation infrastructure concerns. It constitutionally dedicates billions of dollars each year and would tie the hands of future legislatures in a time when the legislature has discretion over less than 20 percent of the state’s budget. This could lead to the state being required to make substantial cuts in state services in the event of a downturn in the state’s economy. There are better alternatives for providing transportation funding that would not affect the state’s ability to respond to a future budget crisis. There is currently a considerable budget surplus available to the legislature that could be appropriated for transportation projects.
MY RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT
This is the third entry in our series on the proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution. This election will be on November 3rd. The review of each proposition can also be reviewed on my website at www.philking.com.
PROPOSITION 3
“The constitutional amendment repealing the requirement that state officers elected by voters statewide reside in the state capital.”
DIGEST: Currently certain state officers elected by the voters statewide, including the comptroller of public accounts, commissioner of the General Land Office, attorney general, commissioner of agriculture, and railroad commissioners, are to reside in Austin, at the state capital, while in office. Proposition 3 removes the residency requirement. The residence of the governor is not affected by this proposed amendment.
SUPPORTERS SAY: Current law requires all statewide officials to move to Travis County when they take office. The capital residency requirement was included in the 1875 Texas Constitution when state officers traveled to the state capital by train, horse and buggy. Some state officers would simply like the freedom to live in a neighboring county to Travis for selection of a preferred school district or similar local preference. Others wish to retain their residence in their home county commuting home on weekends.
OPPONENTS SAY: This amendment would allow state officers, who are serving in full-time paid positions, to be physically present at the state capital infrequently and to possibly neglect their duties of office. State officers serve as the chief operating officers for their respective agencies, which have central offices in Austin, and the officers’ duties require the officers to be available to the agency employees serving in Austin. State officers are often required to conduct statewide business at the seat of government, and residency in a location other than Austin may likely increase the state-reimbursed travel expenses of the officers.
MY RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT
ICYMI: ISRAEl PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU SPEECH TO U.N.
Netanyahu’s speech last week was among the most compelling I’ve ever heard. It’s so rare to hear a true statesman. A link to the full speech can be found HERE.
UPCOMING EVENTS
Parker County Republican Women Monthly Luncheon – October 8th, 11:30 am at Doss Heritage Center
Wise County Republican Party meeting – Monday, October 12th, 6:30 pm at 200 Rook Ramsey, Decatur
This is the second entry in our series on the proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution. This election will be on November 3rd. I warned you some of these are a bit dry to study. Nevertheless, they are all important.
PROPOSTION 2
“The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of a 100 percent or totally disabled veteran who died before the law authorizing a residence homestead exemption for such a veteran took effect.”
DIGEST: Proposition 2 would extend the current homestead property tax exemption that applies to the surviving spouse of a totally disabled veteran who died on or after January 1, 2010, to include the surviving spouse of a totally disabled veteran who: 1) died before January 1, 2010; and 2) would have qualified for the full exemption on the homestead’s entire value if it had been available to totally disabled veterans at that time. A surviving spouse who otherwise qualified would be entitled to an exemption of the same portion of the market value of the same property to which the disabled veteran’s exemption would have applied.
SUPPORTERS SAY: This will provide a valuable form of tax relief for families of deceased disabled veterans. Any fiscal impact on a single taxing district would be minimal. Current law unintentionally creates two classes of surviving spouses and treats them differently depending on when their spouses died. This amendment recognizes the sacrifice by a 100 percent or totally disabled veteran and the person’s surviving spouse as the same regardless of the date on which the disabled veteran died.
OPPONENTS SAY: The Legislative Budget Board’s fiscal note indicates that school districts, municipalities, counties, and other special taxing districts (such as hospitals) will lose some tax revenue under the enactment of this proposition.
MY RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT
OTHER NEWS
This weekend I attended the Texas State Guard Leadership Conference at Camp Swift. About 100 senior officers and NCOs attended. We discussed the TXSG’s mission and vision. Pictured below I am giving a legislative budget update to Major General Nichols, Texas Adjutant General, Major General Jake Betty and his senior command staff. You can learn more about the TXSG at https://www.txmf.us/
LOCAL EVENTS
Thursday, October 1 – Monthly Parker County Republican Party meeting at 7:00 pm in Strain Community Room at Weatherford College
Saturday, October 3 – Red Boot Soiree hosted by Bush Legacy Republican Women
Saturday, January 23 – 2016 Red Gala hosted by Wise Republican Women and Wise County Republican Party with Keynote Address by Lt. Col. Allen West. Buy tickets onlineHERE.
Today we’ll begin a series on the amendments to the Texas Constitution that will be up before the voters on November 3rd. We’ll take up a different amendment each week for seven weeks. I will try to give you both the pros and cons.
I hope this will provide a good overview to help you prepare for election day. I have to warn you though, some of these amendments are a bit dry but they are all important.
PROP 1 BALLOT LANGUAGE: “The constitutional amendment increasing the amount of the residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation for public school purposes from $15,000 to $25,000, providing for a reduction of the limitation on the total amount of ad valorem taxes that may be imposed for those purposes on the homestead of an elderly or disabled person to reflect the increased exemption amount, authorizing the legislature to prohibit a political subdivision that has adopted an optional residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation from reducing the amount of or repealing the exemption, and prohibiting the enactment of a law that imposes a transfer tax on a transaction that conveys fee simple title to real property.”
DIGEST: Proposition 1 would increase the mandatory homestead exemption from $15,000 to $25,000. The taxable value of homesteads owned by the elderly or people who are disabled also would be correspondingly reduced. These provisions would take effect January 1, 2015, and would apply only to a tax year beginning on or after that date.
SUPPORTERS SAY: The property tax is one of the most onerous taxes. In areas of rapid economic growth where demand for housing is strong, homeowners, especially those living on fixed incomes, may be priced out of their homes by rising property taxes. The amount of the mandatory school district residence homestead exemption has not been updated since 1997, while appraisals have continued to increase. This amendment provides much needed tax relief by increasing the amount of the homestead exemption, reducing the amount of taxes paid by a homeowner. By making this effective for 2015 taxes, it ensures that relief is felt immediately. It also promotes economic growth by allowing homeowners to retain more of their money.
OPPONENTS SAY:The homestead exemption increase will only nominally provide property tax relief for homeowners. The exemption will reduce property taxes for the average homeowner by about $126 a year. The homestead exemption increase provides no benefit for those who rent homes. Property taxes are a local matter. The best way to control local property taxes is for voters to hold local officials accountable.
OTHER NEWS
LEGISLATION TO LIFT CRUDE OIL BAN
The U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee this week voted to advance a bill repealing the ban on crude oil exports from the United States. I strongly support this legislative and advocated for repeal of the ban in a letter to the Texas’ congressional delegation last month. Lifting the 1970’s oil embargo is critical for Texas as we have one-third of U.S. crude oil reserves and we are the top producer. Allowing Texas to compete in worldwide markets will promote energy independence and dramatically expand economic development.
STAR OF TEXAS MEMORIAL CEREMONY AND AWARDS
On September 10, I participated in the Star of Texas memorial ceremony hosted by Gov. Greg Abbott. The Star of Texas awards honor first responders who are seriously injured or killed in the line of duty. Pictured below is Sgt. Shane Drake of Fort Worth PD and his wonderful family. Sgt. Drake is still recovering from his wounds. I served at FWPD for 15 years and was proud to see the Drake family recognized.
State Representative Phil King represents Parker and Wise counties in the Texas House of Representatives.
Texas continues to lead the nation in pro-life legislation including the Sonogram bill in 2011, the defunding of Planned Parenthood, and HB2 in 2013 (which was probably the most sweeping pro-life legislation in our nation since Roe v. Wade). Earlier this year, your Texas Legislature passed additional bills defending life.
HB 3994: Requires a woman seeking an elective abortion to provide a valid government photo ID to confirm she is not a minor. Since 2000, the state of Texas has required that minors seeking abortions do so with parental consent, or else must be granted judicial bypass from this requirement. House Bill 3994 tightens this process by requiring that a woman seeking an abortion present to the abortion provider a valid government-issued photo ID to confirm that she is of-age to legally seek an elective abortion without parental consent or judicial bypass. The bill also amends and strengthens the judicial bypass procedure.
HB 416: Requires employees and volunteers at abortion facilities to complete human trafficking training.
Under the provisions of HB 416, any employee, volunteer, or contractor of a licensed abortion facility that performs 50 or more abortions per year must undergo a human trafficking education and training program. The hope is that such a curriculum will train individuals working in these facilities to identify victims of human trafficking so that intervention and assistance can be provided, and no woman is forced to undergo an abortion against her will.
Floor Amendment to HB 1891: Prohibiting community schools from using or providing referrals to abortion providers and their affiliates.
House Bill 1891 establishes a model for community schools which, according to the bill author’s analysis, are “public schools open throughout the year to students, families, and community members before, during, and after school hours.” Supporters contended that while these schools provide quality education and engage the community, prior to legislation there was no definition or model to follow.
A floor amendment was added to the bill that statutorily prohibits community schools from:
· Providing abortion-related services
· Providing referrals to abortion providers or their affiliates
· Partnering with an abortion provider or affiliate in transitioning to a community school
· Hiring an employee of an abortion provider or affiliate as the community school coordinator
HB 3074 : Required provision of artificially administered nutrition and hydration to sustain life.
Under the provisions of HB 3074, artificially administered nutrition and hydration must be provided to patients under the Texas Advance Directives Act. Before enactment of this legislation, Texas law relating to advance directives lacked clarity and potentially allowed for the withdrawal of food, water and pain medication without medical standards for doing so. HB 3074 clarifies that prolonging life is the default priority.
Budgetary Provisions in the 2016-2017 General Appropriations Act
DSHS Rider 72: Prohibits abortion providers and affiliates from participating in the Breast and Cervical Cancer Services (BCCS) Program. This prohibition currently applies to providers in the Texas Women’s Health Program and will be extended to the BCCS program when the new budget becomes effective on September 1, 2015.
HHSC Rider 31: Prohibits the use of any state-funded human sexuality or family planning instruction or materials provided or produced by abortion providers or their affiliates.
HHSC Rider 85: Prohibits the use of any state funds to pay direct or indirect costs associated with abortion procedures provided by any state contractors. Prohibits the distribution of any Women’s Health Services for Family Planning funds to elective abortion providers or any entities that contract with or provide funds to elective abortion providers
HHSC Rider 87: Lays out the requirements that must be met in order for the affiliate of any elective abortion provider to receive family planning funds.
