The Texas Senate recently pushed forward Senate Bill 19 (SB 19), a measure aimed at stopping cities, counties, and school districts from using public funds to hire lobbyists or support nonprofit groups that lobby on their behalf.
Authored by State Senator Mayes Middleton (R-Galveston), the bill passed with strong support, reflecting a growing push to ensure taxpayer dollars aren’t spent advocating against taxpayer interests.
However, a last-minute amendment has stirred controversy, leaving some to question whether the bill still has the teeth to deliver on its promise.
Key Points and Implications
Middleton and supporters say SB 19 targets a practice that has long undermined Texans. Local governments across the state collectively spend millions each year—estimated at $70 million annually—on lobbyists who push agendas at the Capitol, often clashing with priorities like property tax relief or school choice.
The bill’s original intent was clear: bar political subdivisions from hiring registered lobbyists and cut off funding to groups like the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB) that use dues from tax-funded entities to lobby.
Middleton has called it a common-sense fix, arguing that elected officials, not hired guns, should represent their communities.
The Senate’s approval marks a win for accountability advocates, but an amendment from Senator Robert Nichols (R-Jacksonville) muddies the waters.
The change allows nonprofit associations representing local governments to keep employing lobbyists, even if funded by public money.
Critics say this creates a loophole big enough to drive a truck through, potentially letting organizations like TASB continue business as usual. As SB 19 heads to the Texas House, its fate hinges on whether lawmakers tighten the reins or let the compromise stand.
For Dallas residents, the stakes are high. The city has historically leaned on lobbyists to navigate state police, a practice that has cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands annually.
If SB 19 passes in a robust form, it could redirect those funds to local priorities like infrastructure or public safety. However, a weakened version might mean more of the same: tax dollars fueling advocacy that doesn’t always align with voter interests.
Fresh Perspectives from the Ground
As of March 24, 2025, chatter on X and recent reports show a mixed reception. Posts from groups like Texans for Fiscal Responsibility praised the Senate’s move but slammed the Nichols amendment as a “loophole” setback, urging the House to strip it out.
The Texas Senate took a significant step toward ending the egregious practice of taxpayer-funded lobbying, passing SB 19 by @mayes_middleton and we applaud them.
But a troubling amendment added at the last moment weakens the bill’s impact.
Read more 👇https://t.co/0zc2l75Pg0— Texans for Fiscal Responsibility (@Texas_Taxpayers) March 21, 2025
One X user tied to the Texas GOP echoed that call, pressing lawmakers to prohibit tax funding of anti-taxpayer organizations like the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB) and the Texas Municipal League. Meanwhile, some local officials have quietly pushed back, arguing they need a voice in Austin to counter state overreach—a sentiment reflected in past statements from groups like the Texas Association of Counties.
The bill’s journey isn’t over. With the Texas House now in play, observers expect a fierce debate. House Speaker Dustin Burrows (R-Lubbock), a longtime critic of taxpayer-funded lobbying, could steer the bill toward a stricter outcome. But past sessions have seen similar efforts fizzle in the lower chamber, suggesting this fight is far from won.
Supporters vs. Opponents: The Breakdown
Proponents, led by Middleton, frame SB 19 as a victory for transparency. They argue that local governments shouldn’t use public funds to lobby against policies—like lower taxes or parental rights—that many Texans support.
“Look, we don’t need an Austin lobbyist middleman between state legislators and local government,” Middleton has said. “And that’s our job, to represent our constituents directly.”
Backers, including Texans for Fiscal Responsibility, say the $75 million spent on lobbying in 2021 could’ve fixed roads or funded schools instead. Polls bolster their case: nearly 90% of Texans oppose the practice, with 95% of GOP primary voters backing a ban in 2020.
Opponents, though, warn of unintended consequences. Local leaders and groups like TASB argue that without lobbyists, smaller cities and districts—lacking the resources of a Dallas or Houston—might struggle to get their needs heard in Austin.
TASB’s Dax Gonzalez has warned that SB 19 could mute the voice of school boards, which represent thousands of trustees and their communities, framing it as a blow to local advocacy. Critics also note that the bill doesn’t touch private lobbying or federal advocacy, potentially creating an uneven playing field.
What’s Next?
As SB 19 lands in the House, Dallasites and Texans statewide are watching closely. Will lawmakers close the loophole and deliver a full ban, or will compromise prevail again? With the legislative session ticking down, the coming weeks will test whether the state prioritizes taxpayer dollars over insider influence.
For now, the bill’s supporters are gearing up for a showdown, determined to end what they see as a misuse of public trust.