Texas House Bill HB98

Texas 2015 - 84th Regular

• Filed: 11/10/14

Caption

Relating to the Texas Balance of Powers Act.

Impact

If enacted, HB 98 would have significant implications for the relationship between Texas and the federal government. It establishes a framework for state officials to review federal actions that may be deemed unconstitutional and encourages them to resist such measures. The bill proposes the creation of a Joint Legislative Committee on Constitutional Powers and Enforcement to oversee these activities, making a clear institutional commitment to maintaining state sovereignty. This could lead to legal challenges and a re-examination of federal regulations deemed overreaching or unconstitutional.

Summary

House Bill 98, also known as the Texas Balance of Powers Act, seeks to emphasize and protect the powers reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The bill asserts that federal power is limited to only those specific functions and authorities granted explicitly by the Constitution and that any actions by the federal government that extend beyond these powers infringe upon the rights of the states and their citizens. This reinforces the idea that states hold a sovereign authority to regulate their own affairs without undue interference from federal regulations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 98 is markedly divided. Proponents argue that it is a necessary declaration of Texas's rights and an essential safeguard against federal overreach, which they see as a growing threat to state authority and individual freedoms. Critics, however, view the bill as a politically motivated attempt to undermine federal laws and initiatives, arguing that it may foster conflict between state and federal authorities, ultimately leading to confusion and inconsistency in governance.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the bill's potential to disrupt the established balance of authority between state and federal powers. Opponents fear that such a move could weaken vital federal protections and regulations, particularly those related to civil rights and social welfare. Supporters, conversely, emphasize the need for a stronger state response to what they perceive as unconstitutional federal actions. The debate encapsulates a broader discussion about the limits of federal power and the importance of state sovereignty in the governance of the United States.