Texas Senate Bill SB1653

Texas 2013 - 83rd Regular

Caption

Relating to the creation and re-creation of funds and accounts in the state treasury, the dedication and rededication of revenue, and the exemption of unappropriated money from use for general governmental purposes.

Impact

The implications of this bill on state laws include a reevaluation of the roles and responsibilities of state agencies concerning financial management. By restructuring how funds are established and maintained, it seeks to redirect excess revenue or balances into the general revenue fund unless otherwise specified. This would allow for potentially increased funding flexibility for state initiatives, particularly those that fall short of meeting current appropriations.

Summary

SB1653 addresses significant changes regarding the management of funds and accounts within the state treasury. The bill establishes guidelines for the creation and recreation of funds while outlining the circumstances under which currently existing funds would be abolished. Specifically, it sets forth that funds or accounts defined by this Act are to be abandoned unless explicitly exempted. This move aims to streamline the treasury's financial management and ensure a more effective allocation of resources for state agencies.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB1653 appears to be cautiously optimistic among proponents who appreciate the bill's potential to create efficiencies within state financial management. However, there is also some trepidation about the loss of dedicated funds, which could affect programs reliant on those resources. The legislation focuses on fiscal responsibility, but detractors may view it as an undermining of previously established funding commitments.

Contention

A point of contention lies in the provision that allows the legislature to bypass existing dedicated accounts, leading to criticism that the bill may compromise funding for essential state services. The removal of certain dedicated funds could impact specific sectors that rely heavily on those allocations, generating debate over the balance between streamlined fiscal practices and necessary support for local programs and initiatives.