Texas House Bill HB1435

Texas 2017 - 85th Regular

Caption

Relating to commencement and prosecution of certain actions by and to investigations conducted by district and county attorneys under the Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act.

Impact

The modifications set forth in HB1435 mandate that all settlements or penalties collected by district or county attorneys for designated offenses will be equally divided between the state and the county of jurisdiction. This stipulation not only incentivizes local enforcement efforts, but also aims to bolster financial resources for legal services at the county level, potentially improving local legal frameworks for consumer protection.

Summary

House Bill 1435 aims to modify the enforcement framework under the Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act by allowing district and county attorneys to prosecute certain actions associated with the production, sale, distribution, or promotion of specific synthetic substances. The proposed changes seek to empower local authorities to take legal action in instances where the consumer protection division may not intend to intervene, ensuring a more localized approach to consumer protection.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB1435 is largely supportive among those advocating for enhanced local authority in consumer protection, as it is perceived to facilitate more responsive and immediate legal action in addressing deceptive practices. However, there may be concerns from some quarters regarding the increased responsibilities placed on local attorneys and whether they have the requisite resources to effectively manage this expanded role.

Contention

Despite the bill's intentions, notable points of contention may arise regarding the capacity of district and county attorneys to handle these additional responsibilities. Critics might argue that the bill could lead to inconsistencies in enforcement across different jurisdictions, as local attorneys may have varying levels of expertise and resources. This inconsistency could potentially undermine the overall objectives of consumer protection legislation in the state.