Tennessee House Bill HB0653

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/6/25
• Refer: 2/25/25
• Refer: 4/2/25
• Refer: 4/17/25
• Chaptered: 5/15/25
• Passed: 5/15/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 2; Title 3 and Title 67, relative to the bureau of ethics and campaign finance.

Impact

The proposed changes outlined in HB 0653 would significantly impact how political campaigns operate in Tennessee. By mandating annual fees and changes in reporting procedures, the bill seeks to enhance oversight of campaign financing, thereby aiming to bolster ethical standards. The introduction of required penalties for false filing, as well as alterations to the confidentiality surrounding complaint procedures, indicates an effort to increase transparency in the campaign finance arena. Additionally, a tighter regulation on the use of campaign funds for litigation is introduced, which aims to prevent misappropriation of such funds for personal gains.

Summary

House Bill 0653 aims to amend various sections of the Tennessee Code Annotated related to the bureau of ethics and campaign finance. Key provisions in the bill include requirements for local candidates running in multi-county elections to file certification with local election commissions in each county. It establishes an annual registration fee for political campaign committees, which is intended to help offset the costs of regulating these committees. The bill also increases the current threshold for certain types of fees from one hundred dollars to two hundred fifty dollars, thereby adjusting financial requirements for campaign committees.

Contention

Notable points of contention regarding HB 0653 focus on its potential for increasing financial burdens on candidates and campaign committees. Critics may argue that placing additional fees and regulations could deter grassroots candidates or smaller campaigns from participating in the electoral process. Furthermore, the confidentiality rules for complaints filed against candidates could generate debate about the balance between privacy and public accountability—especially concerning the timing of when such information can be disclosed. Overall, the changes proposed invite scrutiny regarding their effectiveness in addressing ethical concerns while simultaneously navigating the complexities of campaign financing.