Enacted appropriations
$338.2BThe sum of the Legislative Budget Board's appropriated FY2026 and FY2027 all-funds totals after legislative, Article IX, technical, and reconciling adjustments. Article totals exclude interagency contracts.
Texas budget, debt, and interest
Texas state-government finances, comparable debt and interest figures, and the enacted budget.
The national companion measures federal finances. Here the unit is Texas state government. Federal debt is not allocated to Texas; a state budget is not the federal budget.
State debt outstanding$70.05BFY2024 · #3 of 50 · highest first
Interest expenditure$1.81BFY2024 · #6 of 50 · highest first
Total state tax collections$87.37BFY2024 · #3 of 50 · highest first
Texas over time
Explore Texas readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Texas officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Texas effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Texas change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
No comparable time series is retained for this topic. The chart shows events and reviewed actions; current state comparisons appear below.
Texas government actions Texas · source units
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
24 of 24 reviewed Texas actions match · 23 date markers shown. 50 major events shown separately.
How major events are selected
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
State debt and interest
Compare state-government balances and interest expenditure from the same Census fiscal-year survey.
Texas · FY2024$70.05B
Texas rank#3among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$1.1TSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
State debt outstanding
Long-term debt outstanding plus short-term debt outstanding at fiscal year end.
State governments only, Census level 2; amounts converted from thousands to dollars. Fiscal-year ending dates differ among states. Excludes local-government debt. Dollar ranks describe scale, not credit quality.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Texas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Texas has a dark outline.
Lower value · $728.59MHigher value · $166.39BStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Texas with every state · 50 ranked
| Rank | State | Value | Comparison notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | California | $166.39B | — |
| #2 | New York | $120.59B | — |
| #3 | Texas · your comparison | $70.05B | — |
| #4 | Massachusetts | $65.87B | — |
| #5 | New Jersey | $57.23B | — |
| #6 | Pennsylvania | $48.67B | — |
| #7 | Illinois | $43.38B | — |
| #8 | Virginia | $33.73B | — |
| #9 | Connecticut | $33.27B | — |
| #10 | Ohio | $32.29B | — |
| #11 | Washington | $30.62B | — |
| #12 | Maryland | $25.9B | — |
| #13 | Michigan | $25.02B | — |
| #14 | Colorado | $23.57B | — |
| #15 | Wisconsin | $22.79B | — |
| #16 | Florida | $20.14B | — |
| #17 | Minnesota | $17.03B | — |
| #18 | Oregon | $16.91B | — |
| #19 | Louisiana | $16.09B | — |
| #20 | South Carolina | $15.36B | — |
| #21 | West Virginia | $15.08B | — |
| #22 | Georgia | $14.05B | — |
| #23 | North Carolina | $13.13B | — |
| #24 | Hawaii | $11.72B | — |
| #25 | Rhode Island | $11.41B | — |
| #26 | Alabama | $10.99B | — |
| #27 | Oklahoma | $10.15B | — |
| #28 | Kentucky | $10.08B | — |
| #29 | Tennessee | $9.03B | — |
| #30 | Indiana | $8.52B | — |
| #31 | Iowa | $8.06B | — |
| #32 | Arkansas | $8.05B | — |
| #33 | Mississippi | $7.72B | — |
| #34 | New Hampshire | $7.58B | — |
| #35 | Kansas | $7.16B | — |
| #36 | New Mexico | $7.12B | — |
| #37 | Missouri | $6.99B | — |
| #38 | Arizona | $6.88B | — |
| #39 | Alaska | $5.72B | — |
| #40 | Utah | $5.55B | — |
| #41 | Maine | $5.3B | — |
| #42 | North Dakota | $4.89B | — |
| #43 | South Dakota | $4.67B | — |
| #44 | Delaware | $3.69B | — |
| #45 | Nebraska | $3.39B | — |
| #46 | Nevada | $2.89B | — |
| #47 | Montana | $2.76B | — |
| #48 | Vermont | $2.67B | — |
| #49 | Wyoming | $1.26B | — |
| #50 | Idaho | $728.59M | — |
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Where state revenue comes from
All measures use Census state-government records for FY2024. Categories describe collections; they do not rank statutory tax rates.
Texas · FY2024$54.35B
Texas rank#1among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$465.4BSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
General sales-tax collections
Census category T09.
State governments only, Census level 2; amounts converted from thousands to dollars. Fiscal-year ending dates differ among states.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Texas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Texas has a dark outline.
Lower value · $0Higher value · $54.35BStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Texas with every state · 50 ranked
| Rank | State | Value | Comparison notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Texas · your comparison | $54.35B | — |
| #2 | California | $53.33B | — |
| #3 | Florida | $40.09B | — |
| #4 | Washington | $22.81B | — |
| #5 | New York | $19.99B | — |
| #6 | Ohio | $16.33B | — |
| #7 | Illinois | $16.05B | — |
| #8 | Pennsylvania | $15.6B | — |
| #9 | New Jersey | $14.31B | — |
| #10 | Tennessee | $14.08B | — |
| #11 | Arizona | $13.16B | — |
| #12 | Michigan | $12.7B | — |
| #13 | North Carolina | $12.16B | — |
| #14 | Indiana | $10.96B | — |
| #15 | Massachusetts | $9.4B | — |
| #16 | Georgia | $9.01B | — |
| #17 | Minnesota | $8.49B | — |
| #18 | Nevada | $8.4B | — |
| #19 | Wisconsin | $7.59B | — |
| #20 | Virginia | $7.4B | — |
| #21 | Maryland | $6.85B | — |
| #22 | South Carolina | $6.44B | — |
| #23 | Connecticut | $6.23B | — |
| #24 | Kentucky | $5.8B | — |
| #25 | Missouri | $5.26B | — |
| #26 | Mississippi | $5.07B | — |
| #27 | Arkansas | $5.07B | — |
| #28 | Louisiana | $4.87B | — |
| #29 | Hawaii | $4.79B | — |
| #30 | Colorado | $4.67B | — |
| #31 | Iowa | $4.64B | — |
| #32 | Utah | $4.63B | — |
| #33 | Alabama | $4.59B | — |
| #34 | Kansas | $4.33B | — |
| #35 | New Mexico | $4.33B | — |
| #36 | Oklahoma | $3.81B | — |
| #37 | Idaho | $3.09B | — |
| #38 | Nebraska | $2.97B | — |
| #39 | Maine | $2.35B | — |
| #40 | West Virginia | $1.82B | — |
| #41 | South Dakota | $1.68B | — |
| #42 | Rhode Island | $1.63B | — |
| #43 | Oregon | $1.34B | — |
| #44 | North Dakota | $1.32B | — |
| #45 | Wyoming | $1.01B | — |
| #46 | Vermont | $597.33M | — |
| #47 | Alaska | $0 | — |
| #47 | Delaware | $0 | — |
| #47 | Montana | $0 | — |
| #47 | New Hampshire | $0 | — |
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Where state operating spending goes
Census categories allow consistent comparisons. These selected categories are not a breakdown of the current Texas appropriations act.
Texas · FY2024$57.32B
Texas rank#3among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$1.02TSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Public welfare current operations
Current operations for public welfare institutions and other public welfare, excluding capital and transfers.
State governments only, Census level 2; amounts converted from thousands to dollars. Fiscal-year ending dates differ among states.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Texas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Texas has a dark outline.
Lower value · $1.09BHigher value · $156.71BStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Texas with every state · 50 ranked
| Rank | State | Value | Comparison notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | California | $156.71B | — |
| #2 | New York | $97.35B | — |
| #3 | Texas · your comparison | $57.32B | — |
| #4 | Illinois | $41.13B | — |
| #5 | Florida | $40.11B | — |
| #6 | Ohio | $39.77B | — |
| #7 | Pennsylvania | $39.34B | — |
| #8 | Massachusetts | $34.12B | — |
| #9 | North Carolina | $30.64B | — |
| #10 | New Jersey | $28.06B | — |
| #11 | Arizona | $26.02B | — |
| #12 | Michigan | $24.37B | — |
| #13 | Virginia | $23.68B | — |
| #14 | Minnesota | $23.37B | — |
| #15 | Indiana | $22.93B | — |
| #16 | Maryland | $21.61B | — |
| #17 | Kentucky | $20.54B | — |
| #18 | Oregon | $20.47B | — |
| #19 | Washington | $19.6B | — |
| #20 | Georgia | $18.99B | — |
| #21 | Louisiana | $18.69B | — |
| #22 | Tennessee | $16.42B | — |
| #23 | Wisconsin | $16.26B | — |
| #24 | Missouri | $15.65B | — |
| #25 | Oklahoma | $14.57B | — |
| #26 | Colorado | $13.6B | — |
| #27 | South Carolina | $12.84B | — |
| #28 | New Mexico | $10.72B | — |
| #29 | Iowa | $10.26B | — |
| #30 | Alabama | $9.73B | — |
| #31 | Arkansas | $8.67B | — |
| #32 | Mississippi | $8.08B | — |
| #33 | Utah | $6.91B | — |
| #34 | Kansas | $6.84B | — |
| #35 | Nevada | $6.62B | — |
| #36 | West Virginia | $6.24B | — |
| #37 | Maine | $5.7B | — |
| #38 | Nebraska | $4.97B | — |
| #39 | Connecticut | $4.88B | — |
| #40 | Rhode Island | $4.54B | — |
| #41 | Hawaii | $4.14B | — |
| #42 | Delaware | $3.97B | — |
| #43 | Idaho | $3.73B | — |
| #44 | Alaska | $3.27B | — |
| #45 | Montana | $2.89B | — |
| #46 | New Hampshire | $2.72B | — |
| #47 | Vermont | $2.69B | — |
| #48 | North Dakota | $2.09B | — |
| #49 | South Dakota | $1.95B | — |
| #50 | Wyoming | $1.09B | — |
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
State operating costs and the enacted budget
The enacted plan, spending categories and audited activity use different periods and accounting scopes; they are kept separate.
Texas · FY2024$136.18B
Texas rank#3among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$2.04TSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Current operation expenditure
Sum of Census current-operation expenditure categories, excluding capital outlay, interest, and assistance/subsidy expenditure.
State governments only, Census level 2; amounts converted from thousands to dollars. Fiscal-year ending dates differ among states. This FY2024 comparison differs in scope and period from Texas’s 2026–27 biennium appropriations and Fiscal year ended August 31, 2025 audit shown below.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Texas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Texas has a dark outline.
Lower value · $4.01BHigher value · $287.03BStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Texas with every state · 50 ranked
| Rank | State | Value | Comparison notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | California | $287.03B | — |
| #2 | New York | $161.37B | — |
| #3 | Texas · your comparison | $136.18B | — |
| #4 | Florida | $86.61B | — |
| #5 | Pennsylvania | $77.15B | — |
| #6 | Illinois | $75.67B | — |
| #7 | Ohio | $66.77B | — |
| #8 | New Jersey | $64.53B | — |
| #9 | Massachusetts | $61.38B | — |
| #10 | North Carolina | $59.01B | — |
| #11 | Michigan | $57.27B | — |
| #12 | Virginia | $53.45B | — |
| #13 | Washington | $49.82B | — |
| #14 | Georgia | $45.19B | — |
| #15 | Maryland | $45.06B | — |
| #16 | Oregon | $41.41B | — |
| #17 | Arizona | $38.71B | — |
| #18 | Minnesota | $38.1B | — |
| #19 | Indiana | $37.4B | — |
| #20 | Kentucky | $36.94B | — |
| #21 | Wisconsin | $34.5B | — |
| #22 | Missouri | $34.43B | — |
| #23 | South Carolina | $32.85B | — |
| #24 | Colorado | $32.73B | — |
| #25 | Louisiana | $31.67B | — |
| #26 | Tennessee | $31.12B | — |
| #27 | Alabama | $26.99B | — |
| #28 | Oklahoma | $24.28B | — |
| #29 | Utah | $22.7B | — |
| #30 | New Mexico | $21.94B | — |
| #31 | Connecticut | $21.22B | — |
| #32 | Iowa | $19.89B | — |
| #33 | Kansas | $18.39B | — |
| #34 | Hawaii | $16.62B | — |
| #35 | Mississippi | $16.46B | — |
| #36 | Arkansas | $16.28B | — |
| #37 | West Virginia | $13.19B | — |
| #38 | Nevada | $12.43B | — |
| #39 | Nebraska | $10.41B | — |
| #40 | Maine | $10.12B | — |
| #41 | Delaware | $9.24B | — |
| #42 | Rhode Island | $8.93B | — |
| #43 | Alaska | $8.4B | — |
| #44 | Idaho | $8.21B | — |
| #45 | New Hampshire | $7.12B | — |
| #46 | Montana | $6.44B | — |
| #47 | Vermont | $6.28B | — |
| #48 | North Dakota | $5.63B | — |
| #49 | South Dakota | $4.55B | — |
| #50 | Wyoming | $4.01B | — |
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Where state tax revenue comes from
FY2025 audited actualShares of the $85.4 billion in taxes reported as general revenue by Texas's primary government. This denominator excludes federal grants, service charges, investment income, lottery activity, and locally collected property taxes.
- Sales and use tax
- $49.5B · 58%
- Oil and natural-gas production taxes
- $8.0B · 9.4%
- Motor vehicle and manufactured-housing taxes
- $7.3B · 8.5%
- Franchise tax
- $7.1B · 8.3%
- Insurance occupation tax
- $4.7B · 5.5%
- Motor-fuel, tobacco, and other taxes
- $8.8B · 10.3%
2026–27 all-funds spending plan
2026–27 bienniumThe $338.2 billion biennial appropriation grouped by Legislative Budget Board article. Every article is included, and the figures use the same all-funds scope as the budget total above.
- Education
- $133.1B · 39.3%
- Health and human services
- $107.6B · 31.8%
- Business and economic development
- $48.5B · 14.3%
- Public safety and criminal justice
- $19.8B · 5.9%
- General government
- $12.5B · 3.7%
- Natural resources, judiciary, regulatory, and legislature
- $16.7B · 4.9%
Audited government-wide results
Fiscal year ended August 31, 2025- Revenue
- $251.5B
- Expenses
- $222.8B
Audited government-wide activity for Texas's primary government. Revenue is the sum of all program revenue and general revenue in the Statement of Activities; these are accounting results, not the 2026–27 appropriation.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about budgets, government spending, deficits and public debt from FactVote’s Texas candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
2026 Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts — General Election
DON HUFFINES
2 statementsBudgets, spending & debt
Texas spends over $500 million a day, seven days a week. Don Huffines will conduct forensic audits across all local governments and state agencies to ensure tax dollars are spent properly and transparently. Under a Huffines administration, no one in government will feel safe from a surprise audit. H…
Read exact statement & source
Texas spends over $500 million a day, seven days a week. Don Huffines will conduct forensic audits across all local governments and state agencies to ensure tax dollars are spent properly and transparently. Under a Huffines administration, no one in government will feel safe from a surprise audit. He will shift the focus of the Comptroller’s office away from auditing businesses and toward aggressively auditing government spending, finding savings, and returning budget surpluses to taxpayers through property tax relief for businesses, renters, and homeowners.DON HUFFINES — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
View 1 more statement from DON HUFFINES
Budgets, spending & debt
Texas is growing faster than our infrastructure can handle. Working with the Legislature, Huffines will advance creative, forward-looking solutions to modernize highways, airports, ports, and power systems. As the state’s chief purchasing officer, he will review major contracts, including TxDOT’s, t…
Read exact statement & source
Texas is growing faster than our infrastructure can handle. Working with the Legislature, Huffines will advance creative, forward-looking solutions to modernize highways, airports, ports, and power systems. As the state’s chief purchasing officer, he will review major contracts, including TxDOT’s, to ensure projects are delivered on time, on budget, and ahead of the demand curve, reducing traffic and keeping Texas open for business.DON HUFFINES — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
SHEHLA FAIZI
1 statementBudgets, spending & debt
Opposes Texas data-center tax breaks and favors directing public resources toward disaster relief and public schools; the comptroller cannot repeal tax law or redirect appropriations alone.
Read exact statement & source
Opposes Texas data-center tax breaks and favors directing public resources toward disaster relief and public schools; the comptroller cannot repeal tax law or redirect appropriations alone.SHEHLA FAIZI — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
2026 Texas Governor — General Election
JENN MACK
2 statementsBudgets, spending & debt
Property taxes hit every Texan — regardless of party — and they're one of the defining issues of this election. Texas' budget has grown faster than population and inflation combined — expanding like the most progressive states in the country.
Read exact statement & source
Property taxes hit every Texan — regardless of party — and they're one of the defining issues of this election. Texas' budget has grown faster than population and inflation combined — expanding like the most progressive states in the country.JENN MACK — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
View 1 more statement from JENN MACK
Budgets, spending & debt
Require plain-language budget summaries so every Texan can follow where their money goes.
Read exact statement & source
Require plain-language budget summaries so every Texan can follow where their money goes.JENN MACK — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
PAT DIXON
1 statementBudgets, spending & debt
I suspect he really does not intend to stop wasteful local spending because he can’t. Instead, a Governor could reduce state spending. When Ann Richards left office the state budget was $35B per year. Under Republicans it has grown to $169B per year (almost 5 time more). If you factor population and…
Read exact statement & source
I suspect he really does not intend to stop wasteful local spending because he can’t. Instead, a Governor could reduce state spending. When Ann Richards left office the state budget was $35B per year. Under Republicans it has grown to $169B per year (almost 5 time more). If you factor population and inflation, it is not as bad. The per capita state budget adjusted for inflation rose from $4,135 after Ann Richards to $5,329 today.PAT DIXON — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
2026 Texas Lieutenant Governor — General Election
ANTHONY CRISTO
4 statementsBudgets, spending & debt
Adopt a balanced Texas budget while setting clear spending priorities.
Read exact statement & source
Adopt a balanced Texas budget while setting clear spending priorities.ANTHONY CRISTO — candidate-owned primary source ↗
View 3 more statements from ANTHONY CRISTO
Budgets, spending & debt
If we want real tax relief, we have to shrink government. That means setting priorities, cutting waste, and letting Texans keep more of what they earn. There currently is a budget surplus, but that shows how we are being taxed more than we need to be. It also means school districts can be properly f…
Read exact statement & source
If we want real tax relief, we have to shrink government. That means setting priorities, cutting waste, and letting Texans keep more of what they earn. There currently is a budget surplus, but that shows how we are being taxed more than we need to be. It also means school districts can be properly funded without increasing taxes of any kind.ANTHONY CRISTO — candidate-owned primary source ↗
Budgets, spending & debt
I believe Texas needs leadership that respects individual liberty, spends responsibly, and tells the truth. I’m committed to fighting for a balanced budget, protecting your rights, properly funding schools, and bringing a straightforward, no-nonsense approach to state government. If my opponents are…
Read exact statement & source
I believe Texas needs leadership that respects individual liberty, spends responsibly, and tells the truth. I’m committed to fighting for a balanced budget, protecting your rights, properly funding schools, and bringing a straightforward, no-nonsense approach to state government. If my opponents are willing to debate the issues, I’ll be ready.ANTHONY CRISTO — candidate-owned primary source ↗
Budgets, spending & debt
Cut waste and reduce government spending so Texans keep more of what they earn.
Read exact statement & source
Cut waste and reduce government spending so Texans keep more of what they earn.ANTHONY CRISTO — candidate-owned primary source ↗
VIKKI GOODWIN
2 statementsBudgets, spending & debt
Cost: The program's cost will primarily depend on how many people enroll and what health services they use. Administrative costs will scale with enrollment but should remain a relatively small portion of the total budget.
Read exact statement & source
Cost: The program's cost will primarily depend on how many people enroll and what health services they use. Administrative costs will scale with enrollment but should remain a relatively small portion of the total budget.VIKKI GOODWIN — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗
View 1 more statement from VIKKI GOODWIN
Budgets, spending & debt
Tier II: Lone Star Basic Cost: The program's cost will primarily depend on how many people enroll and what health services they use. Administrative costs will scale with enrollment but should remain a relatively small portion of the total budget.Funding Mechanisms: Federal payments would finance mos…
Read exact statement & source
Tier II: Lone Star Basic Cost: The program's cost will primarily depend on how many people enroll and what health services they use. Administrative costs will scale with enrollment but should remain a relatively small portion of the total budget.Funding Mechanisms: Federal payments would finance most of Lone Star Basic. Currently, federal dollars flow to insurers to lower the cost of Marketplace coverage for eligible Texans. Under Lone Star Basic, 95% of the federal funding that would have gone to private insurers would instead go to Texas to help fund the program. A Texas-specific actuarial analysis would determine the total federal payment based on enrollment projections. The state would cover any remaining program costs and administrative expenses.VIKKI GOODWIN — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 9
How statements are selected
This section matches specific budgets, government spending, deficits and public debt terms in retained, attributed source text from published Texas candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Texas legislators and Texas’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Texas’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
30 matching sponsorships or proposals · 21 Texas incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Rep. Briscoe Cain
Texas House · District 128 · –TX
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Briscoe Cain
Relating to an appropriation to provide funding for the construction, operation, and maintenance of border barrier infrastructure and border security operations, including funding for additional overtime expenses and costs due to certain increased law enforcement presence.
Nov 10, 2023 · H No action taken in committee
Rep. Greg Bonnen · Sponsored / Rep. Briscoe Cain · Sponsored / Rep. Mano DeAyala · Sponsored / Rep. Stan Kitzman · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill would provide funding for the construction, operation, and maintenance of border barrier infrastructure and border security operations, including funding for additional overtime expenses and costs due to certain increased law enforcement presence.
The latest official Texas Legislature report records this action on November 10, 2023: H No action taken in committee.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses immigration status, immigrant services, asylum, deportation, border security, or immigration enforcement. It does not update or establish an effect on the displayed foreign-born population share.
Retained Texas evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born · Reported violent-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Relating to an appropriation to provide funding for the construction, operation, and maintenance of border barrier infrastructure and border security operations, including funding for additional overtime expenses and costs due to certain increased law enforcement presence.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. Chip Roy
U.S. representative for Texas, District 21 · R–TX
2 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Chip Roy
Homeland Security and Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act, 2026
Apr 6, 2026 · Introduced
Rep. Chip Roy · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
None of the funds made available for Border Security Assets and Infrastructure under the heading U.S.
Referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses immigration status, immigrant services, asylum, deportation, border security, or immigration enforcement. It does not update or establish an effect on the displayed foreign-born population share.
Retained Texas evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born · Registered-voter turnout · Reported violent-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
None of the funds made available for Border Security Assets and Infrastructure under the heading U.S.Review official supporting evidence ↗
State Border Security Assistance Act
May 16, 2025 · Introduced
Rep. Chip Roy · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
McCaul) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concernedA BILLTo establish the State Border Security Reinforcement Fund and the State Criminal Alien Prosecution and Detention Fund, to make appropriations to each of these funds, and to authorize the use of…
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses immigration status, immigrant services, asylum, deportation, border security, or immigration enforcement. It does not update or establish an effect on the displayed foreign-born population share.
Retained Texas evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
McCaul) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concernedA BILLTo establish the State Border Security Reinforcement Fund and the State Criminal Alien Prosecution and Detention Fund, to make appropriations to each of these funds, and to authorize the use of…Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. Cody Harris
Texas House · District 8 · –TX
2 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Cody Harris
Relating to municipalities and counties that adopt budgets that defund law enforcement agencies.
May 10, 2021 · H Considered in Calendars
Rep. Cody Harris · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses crime prevention, a violent offense, law enforcement, sentencing, supervision, corrections, or victim safety.
The latest official Texas Legislature report records this action on May 10, 2021: H Considered in Calendars.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses crime prevention, a violent offense, law enforcement, sentencing, supervision, corrections, or victim safety. It does not establish an effect on Texas's reported violent-crime rate.
Retained Texas evidence context: Reported violent-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Relating to municipalities and counties that adopt budgets that defund law enforcement agencies.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Relating to municipalities and counties that adopt budgets that reduce the funding or personnel allocated for law enforcement agencies.
May 10, 2021 · H Considered in Calendars
Rep. Cody Harris · Sponsored / Rep. Morgan Meyer · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses crime prevention, a violent offense, law enforcement, sentencing, supervision, corrections, or victim safety.
The latest official Texas Legislature report records this action on May 10, 2021: H Considered in Calendars.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses crime prevention, a violent offense, law enforcement, sentencing, supervision, corrections, or victim safety. It does not establish an effect on Texas's reported violent-crime rate.
Retained Texas evidence context: Reported violent-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Relating to municipalities and counties that adopt budgets that reduce the funding or personnel allocated for law enforcement agencies.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. Eddie Morales
Texas House · District 74 · –TX
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Eddie Morales
Relating to making supplemental appropriations relating to border security and giving direction regarding those appropriations.
Sep 17, 2021 · Enacted
Rep. Greg Bonnen · Sponsored / Rep. Will Metcalf · Sponsored / Rep. Eddie Morales · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses immigration status, immigrant services, asylum, deportation, border security, or immigration enforcement.
The official Texas Legislature record shows this enacted action on September 17, 2021: E Effective immediately.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses immigration status, immigrant services, asylum, deportation, border security, or immigration enforcement. It does not update or establish an effect on the displayed foreign-born population share.
Retained Texas evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Relating to making supplemental appropriations relating to border security and giving direction regarding those appropriations.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. Greg Bonnen
Texas House · District 24 · –TX
2 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Greg Bonnen
Relating to an appropriation to provide funding for the construction, operation, and maintenance of border barrier infrastructure and border security operations, including funding for additional overtime expenses and costs due to certain increased law enforcement presence.
Nov 10, 2023 · H No action taken in committee
Rep. Greg Bonnen · Sponsored / Rep. Briscoe Cain · Sponsored / Rep. Mano DeAyala · Sponsored / Rep. Stan Kitzman · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill would provide funding for the construction, operation, and maintenance of border barrier infrastructure and border security operations, including funding for additional overtime expenses and costs due to certain increased law enforcement presence.
The latest official Texas Legislature report records this action on November 10, 2023: H No action taken in committee.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses immigration status, immigrant services, asylum, deportation, border security, or immigration enforcement. It does not update or establish an effect on the displayed foreign-born population share.
Retained Texas evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born · Reported violent-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Relating to an appropriation to provide funding for the construction, operation, and maintenance of border barrier infrastructure and border security operations, including funding for additional overtime expenses and costs due to certain increased law enforcement presence.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Relating to making supplemental appropriations relating to border security and giving direction regarding those appropriations.
Sep 17, 2021 · Enacted
Rep. Greg Bonnen · Sponsored / Rep. Will Metcalf · Sponsored / Rep. Eddie Morales · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses immigration status, immigrant services, asylum, deportation, border security, or immigration enforcement.
The official Texas Legislature record shows this enacted action on September 17, 2021: E Effective immediately.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses immigration status, immigrant services, asylum, deportation, border security, or immigration enforcement. It does not update or establish an effect on the displayed foreign-born population share.
Retained Texas evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Relating to making supplemental appropriations relating to border security and giving direction regarding those appropriations.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. John Bryant
Texas House · District 114 · –TX
2 proposalsView proposals from Rep. John Bryant
Proposing a constitutional amendment to authorize the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation by a school district of a portion of the market value of certain leased residential real properties, to establish and prescribe the permissible uses of the property tax relief to rental households fund, and to include payments from the property tax relief to rental households fund in the exception of certain appropriations to pay for ad valorem tax relief from the constitutional limitation on the rate of growth of appropriations.
Apr 3, 2025 · H Referred to Ways & Means: Apr 3 2025 12:38PM
Rep. John Bryant · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill would authorize the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation by a school district of a portion of the market value of certain leased residential real properties; establish and prescribe the permissible uses of the property tax relief to rental households fund, and to include payments from the property tax relief to rental households fund in the exception of certain appropriations to pay for ad valorem tax relief from the constitutional limitation on the rate of growth of appropriations.
The latest official Texas Legislature report records this action on April 3, 2025: H Referred to Ways & Means: Apr 3 2025 12:38PM.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses rental housing, tenant protections, housing assistance, homelessness, or housing supply. It does not establish an effect on Texas's median gross rent.
Retained Texas evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Proposing a constitutional amendment to authorize the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation by a school district of a portion of the market value of certain leased residential real properties, to establish and prescribe the permissible uses of the property tax relief to rental households fund, and to include payments from the property tax relief to rental households fund in the exception of certain appropriations to pay for ad valorem tax relief from the constitutional limitation on the…Review official supporting evidence ↗
Proposing a constitutional amendment to increase the amount of the exemption from ad valorem taxation by a school district applicable to residence homesteads, to adjust the amount of the limitation on school district ad valorem taxes imposed on the residence homesteads of the elderly or disabled to reflect increases in certain exemption amounts, to establish the property tax relief to rental households fund and authorize the legislature to provide payments to rental households from that fund based on a proportion of rent paid, and to except certain appropriations to pay for school district ad valorem tax relief and property tax relief payments to rental households from the constitutional limitation on the rate of growth of appropriations.
Jul 6, 2023 · H Filed
Rep. John Bryant · Sponsored / Rep. Vikki Goodwin · Sponsored / Rep. Suleman Lalani · Sponsored / Rep. Mihaela Plesa · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Proposing a constitutional amendment to increase the amount of the exemption from ad valorem taxation by a school district applicable to residence homesteads, to adjust the amount of the limitation on school district ad valorem taxes imposed on the residence homesteads of the elderly or disabled to reflect increases in certain exemption amounts, to establish the property tax relief to rental households fund and authorize the legislature to provide payments to rental households from that fund based on a proportion of rent paid, and to except certain appropriations to pay for school district ad valorem tax relief and property tax relief payments to rental households from the constitutional…
The latest official Texas Legislature report records this action on July 6, 2023: H Filed.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses rental housing, tenant protections, housing assistance, homelessness, or housing supply. It does not establish an effect on Texas's median gross rent.
Retained Texas evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Proposing a constitutional amendment to increase the amount of the exemption from ad valorem taxation by a school district applicable to residence homesteads, to adjust the amount of the limitation on school district ad valorem taxes imposed on the residence homesteads of the elderly or disabled to reflect increases in certain exemption amounts, to establish the property tax relief to rental households fund and authorize the legislature to provide payments to rental households from that fund based on a proportion…Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us
Only current Texas officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Texas statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 2, 2026.