Texas 2009 - 81st Regular

Texas House Bill HB3239

Voted on by House
 
Out of Senate Committee
 
Voted on by Senate
 
Governor Action
 
Bill Becomes Law
 

Caption

Relating to the creation of legislative committees to study proposals on the conduct of gaming in this state.

Impact

The introduction of HB 3239 represents a significant step towards the potential legalization and regulation of gaming activities within Texas. Given that the bill specifies local option elections, it acknowledges the autonomy of counties to make independent decisions about whether to permit gaming. This approach reflects a compromise between state-level oversight and local governance, which could lead to a varying landscape of gaming regulation across the state based on local preferences and results from public votes.

Summary

House Bill 3239 proposes the establishment of two legislative review committees, the House Gaming Legislation Review Committee and the Senate Gaming Legislation Review Committee, tasked with the evaluation and recommendation of legislative proposals regarding the conduct of gaming in Texas. The bill is structured to allow these committees to study the viability of legalizing gaming in counties that opt to approve such activities through local elections. By forming these committees, the legislature aims to take a closer look at the implications and frameworks necessary for potential gaming legislation.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the successful passage of HB 3239 could set the stage for a larger discussion about gaming policy in Texas. If the review committees can effectively address the concerns of skeptics while highlighting potential benefits, there may be enough legislative support to advance proposals for gaming. This bill thus not only establishes committees but also opens a broader dialogue about the future of gaming in Texas and how it integrates with state law and local governance.

Contention

While the bill's framework appears straightforward, the issue of gaming in Texas remains contentious. Perspectives on gaming legislation often divide legislators along party lines, and there is historical resistance to expanding gaming in various forms due to concerns about social impacts and community values. Critics argue that legislative facilitation of gaming could lead to increases in crime and problem gambling, while proponents contend that regulated gaming can generate significant economic benefits for local communities, including job creation and increased tax revenue.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

MI HB4870

Campaign finance: contributions and expenditures; funds donated to a candidate for recall efforts; require candidate to establish a separate account used for recall purposes. Amends secs. 3, 11, 12, 21, 24 & 52 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.203 et seq.) & adds sec. 21b.

MI HB4326

Campaign finance: contributions and expenditures; provision related to officeholders raising funds when facing a recall; modify, and require candidate to establish a separate account used for recall purposes. Amends secs. 3, 11, 12, 21, 24 & 52 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.203 et seq.) & adds sec. 21b.

CA SB602

Advisory bodies.

CA SB1048

Advisory bodies.

CA AB3239

Advisory bodies.

KS HR6003

Providing temporary rules of the House of Representatives for the 2023 session until permanent rules are adopted.

MN HC1

A house concurrent resolution relating to the regent nomination joint committee.

AZ HB2443

Campaign finance; contributions limits