Texas Senate Bill SB1192

Texas 2015 - 84th Regular

Caption

Relating to the confidentiality of certain information stored as part of the preparation of reports and personal financial statements required to be filed with the Texas Ethics Commission.

Impact

The proposed legislative change is anticipated to strengthen data protection measures for individuals and entities required to file disclosures with the Ethics Commission. By ensuring confidentiality during the preparation stage of these reports, the bill aims to alleviate concerns about potential leaks of sensitive personal financial data. This aligns with broader trends in government data management and privacy, emphasizing accountability while safeguarding individual privacy rights.

Summary

Senate Bill 1192, introduced by Senator Zaffirini, is aimed at enhancing the confidentiality of certain information related to financial reports and statements that must be submitted to the Texas Ethics Commission. The bill specifically amends the Government Code to ensure that any electronic data temporarily stored by the Commission for the purpose of report preparation remains confidential and cannot be disclosed. This change seeks to protect sensitive financial information until it is officially filed, at which point the data becomes public under existing laws governing public information disclosures.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB1192 appears to be predominantly favorable among legislators and advocates for privacy rights. Supporters argue that the bill represents a necessary step toward greater transparency without compromising sensitive financial disclosures until required. Critics, however, may express concern regarding the balance between public access to information and the need for confidentiality, especially in the context of government transparency and accountability to citizens.

Contention

A potential point of contention could arise around the implications of increased confidentiality on public oversight and accountability. While the bill aims to protect individuals from premature disclosure of their financial data, opponents might argue that the move could impede the public's ability to scrutinize the financial dealings of public officials. Such debates may highlight the ongoing tension between the need for privacy and the demand for transparency in government operations.