Texas Senate Bill SB1702

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of Senate Committee: 3/31/11
• Voted on by Senate: 4/5/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/12/11
• Refer: 4/29/11
• Report Pass: 5/11/11

Caption

Relating to the establishment of a task force to enhance the prosecution and tracking of money laundering in this state.

Impact

The establishment of the task force is expected to streamline communication and resource sharing between various state agencies, including the Department of Public Safety, banking commissions, and federal agencies such as the FBI and the IRS. This collaborative approach may lead to more efficient investigations and prosecutions within the state, ideally enhancing the capacity of law enforcement to tackle complex financial crimes, which often cross jurisdictional lines. Any successful enforcement led by the task force could contribute to a decrease in money laundering cases and an increase in financial integrity within Texas's economic framework.

Summary

SB1702 establishes a Money Laundering Task Force within the state government of Texas aimed at enhancing the prosecution and tracking of money laundering activities. This bill assigns significant responsibilities to the Office of the Attorney General, which will coordinate efforts among state, federal, and local law enforcement agencies. By creating a collaborative framework, the task force seeks to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of law enforcement in addressing money laundering, thereby increasing overall public safety and ensuring compliance with financial regulations.

Contention

While the bill aims to strengthen the state's capabilities in combating money laundering, it may raise concerns related to privacy and the handling of confidential information. The provision allowing agencies to share confidential information for investigative purposes may create apprehension among citizens regarding surveillance and administrative overreach. Additionally, the task force's ability to solicit donations and funding from various sources could lead to debates about potential conflicts of interest or the influence of private donors on public law enforcement efforts.