Relating to the establishment of the election integrity division in the office of the attorney general.
Summary
SB 318 would require the Texas Office of the Attorney General to create an Election Integrity Division. The division would be tasked with investigating reports of election fraud and alleged violations of the Election Code, working in support of the appropriate county or district attorney. It would operate using available or appropriated funds and could request assistance from state law enforcement agencies.
The bill also gives the division subpoena power in investigations. It could compel a political subdivision to produce documents or information, or require witnesses to appear and testify. The bill is set to take effect September 1, 2025, if enacted.
Impact
If enacted, SB 318 would add a new section to Chapter 402 of the Government Code and expand the Attorney General’s role in election-related investigations. It would create a new state-level enforcement unit with authority to investigate suspected election fraud and Election Code offenses, coordinate with local prosecutors, and issue administrative subpoenas to local governments and other political subdivisions. The bill would affect the Attorney General’s office, county and district attorneys, state law enforcement agencies, and local governmental entities that may be subject to subpoenas or investigative requests.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have had meaningful support in the Senate, where it passed second and third readings on party-line or near party-line votes of 19-11 and 20-11. However, it ultimately failed to receive an affirmative vote in House committee, indicating that support did not carry through the full legislative process. Overall, the voting pattern suggests the bill was politically divisive, with stronger support among proponents of expanded election enforcement and resistance from those concerned about the proposal’s scope or implications.
Contention
The main points of contention likely centered on whether the Attorney General should have a new dedicated election enforcement division and how much power it should have over local entities. Supporters likely viewed the bill as a tool to strengthen election integrity and investigate fraud, while opponents may have been concerned about state overreach, duplication of local prosecutorial authority, and the use of administrative subpoenas against political subdivisions. The bill’s failure to secure an affirmative House committee vote suggests unresolved disagreement over these enforcement powers and the proper balance between state and local control.
Relating to the establishment of a statewide human trafficking data repository within the office of the attorney general and to reporting of human trafficking data to the office of the attorney general and by the attorney general.
AN ACT relating to the administration of government; providing for the election of the attorney general; designating the attorney general as a state elected official; setting the attorney general's term of office; setting the attorney general's salary; providing for filling a vacancy in the position; repealing and modifying provisions for interim appointment; providing for the application of the Ethics and Disclosure Act and other laws to the office of the attorney general and attorney general as a state elected official; amending certain provisions regarding actions the attorney general takes requiring approval of or pursuant to the direction of the governor; prescribing additional duties of the attorney general; making conforming amendments; repealing an obsolete provision; and providing for effective dates.