Transcript Highlights:

• Harassment and harm.
• The law does have some evidence or requirements for intention, to prove up intention, but I'm not.
• not intent.
• Is it your intent, or is it the bill's intent, on the life of the mother act with this bill?
• It's an agency from—because you're telling me what your intent is, but we all have a lot of intent.

Bills: SB 8, HB7, HB15, HB 265, HCR 13, SB 8, HB 7, HB 15, HB 265, HCR 13

Keywords: sex designation, restroom access, civil penalties, private civil right of action, women's privacy, abortion, healthcare, jurisdiction, civil action, qui tam, prohibition, state law, youth camp, safety regulations, advisory committee, child welfare, health standards, summer camp, camp safety, child abuse reporting

Transcript Highlights:

• And the intentions dear to their hearts.
• If this material is harmful to them, which studies show even on the NIH website, showing that it is harmful
• If this material is harmful to them, which studies show even on the NIH website, showing that it is harmful
• It is harmful to our children.
• Understanding the intent, understanding the intent, but recognizing that the mechanism is the problem

Summary: The House convened with prayer, moments of silence for former member Terry Fields and the Parkland victims, the Pledge of Allegiance, and recognition of guests and visitors. The chamber then adopted the Rules and Ethics Committee’s special order report setting the day’s calendar and debate times. The main measure taken up was HB 1119, relating to materials harmful to minors in public schools and charter schools, which the sponsor described as a clarification of existing law to keep pornographic or sexually explicit material away from minors and to give districts clearer standards for review and objection processes. The bill drew extensive debate over constitutional concerns, local control, litigation risk, and the scope of the definition of “harmful to minors.” Members supporting the bill argued it was needed to close loopholes and protect children, while opponents warned it could lead to overbroad book removals, conflict with federal court rulings, and costly lawsuits. A series of amendments sought to narrow or redirect the bill: proposals by Gant, Aristide, Bartleman, Eskamani, Nixon, Rainer, Woodson, and Harris would have preserved literary value review, protected educational and abuse-prevention materials, exempted LGBTQ-inclusive books, limited objections, preserved funding for districts, or delayed enforcement during ongoing litigation. Supporters of the amendments framed them as protecting parental choice, academic value, student safety, and district finances; opponents said they would weaken the bill’s child-protection purpose. All of the amendments failed. After the amendment process, the House waived rules, read HB 1119 a third time by title, and entered structured debate on final passage. Debate continued along the same lines, with opponents emphasizing book removals, First Amendment concerns, and the impact on students and schools, and supporters reiterating that the bill was intended to prevent minors from accessing obscene material. The transcript provided ends during structured debate and does not include the final vote on HB 1119.

Transcript Highlights:

• was due to negligent, reckless, or harm was due to negligent, reckless, or intentional<00:02:58.720>
• :08:44.480> harmed.
• harm has been proven in a court of law. harm has been proven in a court of law.
• . harmed. harmed.
• It's about the woman that's been harmed. It's about the woman that's been harmed.

Bills: HB0003, HB0117, HB0041

Keywords: pregnancy centers, abortion, pro-life, healthcare, women's rights, state regulation, civil rights, freedom of speech, informed consent, civil liability, coercion, healthcare rights, law enforcement, death benefits, retirement, survivor support, public safety, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• concerns um the first one was harm concerns um the first one was harm reduction<00:36:26.560>
• and individual harm.
• same strategies to M minimize the harm same strategies to M minimize the harm of<00:39:35.359>
• focus of just minimizing individual harm focus of just minimizing individual harm has<00:43:34.880
• <00:55:54.400> reduction everything I did about harm reduction everything I did about harm

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And in so doing, they are harming our youth.
• I definitely understand your intent.
• So it harms the entire economy associated with that, and it certainly harms the artist's brand in every
• And these are just the harms Megan Garcia: These are just the harms we currently know.
• Most concerningly, harmful and harmful ways also remains undefined.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 56, which would require social media platforms to display a warning label about potential mental health harms from prolonged use, with amendments shortening the initial warning and allowing immediate access to the platform. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost a daughter to suicide and a therapist, argued that social media contributes to teen anxiety, self-harm, and other harms and that families need clearer public health information. Opponents from tech and civil liberties groups argued the bill would be ineffective, burdensome, and likely unconstitutional, saying it would create warning fatigue and should be replaced by more targeted tools and digital literacy measures. Several members discussed emergency access concerns, language access, and whether the warning should be more actionable; the bill was moved on a 9-0 vote to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then took up AB 358, which would amend CalECPA to allow law enforcement, with the victim’s consent, to inspect certain abandoned tracking or surveillance devices found in a victim’s home, vehicle, or personal property without first obtaining a warrant. The author and a San Diego prosecutor said the bill is narrowly tailored to devices used solely for spying and is intended to help stalking and domestic violence survivors act quickly before evidence is lost. Opponents from EFF and the ACLU warned the bill would weaken warrant protections, create a loophole around CalECPA, and reduce transparency and accountability. Members debated Fourth Amendment issues, abandonment, and the practical need for rapid access; the bill passed the committee on a 9-0 vote to Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 1137, which builds on last year’s CSAM reporting law by allowing any user to report child sexual abuse material, requiring clearer reporting mechanisms, adding human review in some cases, and mandating third-party audits and public reporting. Supporters, including survivor advocates and a parent of a child victim, said the bill would reduce the burden on survivors and improve removal of abusive content. Tech industry opponents said they support the goal but objected to the human-review mandate, public audit disclosures, and enforcement provisions, arguing they could create security risks and compliance burdens. Members generally supported the bill’s intent but raised questions about audit frequency and human review; the bill was moved on call with seven votes at the time of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator McLean, SB 1692, Material That Is Harmful to Minors. There is a delete-all amendment.
• penalties for harm...
• materials harmful to minors remain consistent with current law.
• And then harmful to minors, the definition remains the same.
• If it is 840.1.1.2, then it is considered pornographic and it's considered harmful to minors.

Summary: The committee first considered the appointment of Michelle Whitworth to the Florida Commission on Offender Review. Whitworth described her 30 years of criminal justice experience, and the committee voted to recommend her confirmation favorably. The committee then took up SB 1692 on material harmful to minors, adopting a delete-all amendment that shifted the focus to K-12 instructional materials and objections by parents or residents. Supporters argued it would create clearer standards and protect children from pornographic content, while opponents warned it would worsen book bans and remove consideration of literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. After extensive debate and public testimony, the bill as amended was reported favorably. The committee also reported favorably on several criminal justice and public safety bills. SB 1422 increased penalties for certain drone-related offenses near critical infrastructure and for weaponized drones; SB 1360 clarified xylazine’s veterinary use while creating stronger trafficking penalties; and SB 1732 increased penalties for animal cruelty involving minors and for contributing to a minor’s delinquency. SB 776 added an aggravating factor for the assassination or attempted assassination of a head of state, and SB 984 added aggravating factors for capital felonies committed where people are gathered for religious, school, or government activities. SB 1640 made domestic violence lethality assessment forms confidential, and SB 1268 updated FDLE operations and increased reimbursement for retired police dogs. All of these bills were reported favorably after brief debate and mostly supportive testimony. Later, the committee approved SB 1084 on sexual cyber harassment, with a strike-all amendment addressing digitally forged intimate images and extending prosecution time limits. SB 1654 updated sexual offender and predator registration rules, including definitions of residence and online reporting for in-state travel, though one witness raised concerns about vague language and employer privacy. SB 1774 created a rebuttable presumption in certain second-degree murder cases when the victim had a controlled substance in their system, drawing criticism that it could devalue victims who used drugs. Finally, SB 1838 strengthened protections for court officials against tampering, harassment, and retaliation, with an amendment adding magistrates, hearing officers, and related staff; defense attorneys warned the tampering language could inadvertently reach zealous advocacy. Each of these measures was ultimately reported favorably, and the meeting ended with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• We appreciate the intent of this bill.
• Great the harm was, how great the value was.
• I mean, with all due respect to the harm that occurs, why is that harm any greater to someone who steals
• I think that the harms are very different in kind.
• The harms are very different in kind.

Bills: SB23, SB221, SB261, SB264

Keywords: student use, wireless devices, public schools, policy implementation, education technology funding, misappropriation, petroleum products, oil and gas equipment, racketeering, criminal penalties, New Mexico, public safety, health regulations, community welfare, peace promotion, legislative reforms, election integrity, voter coercion, emergency procedures, polling place security

Transcript Highlights:

• It's sexual material that is harmful to minors.
• So how does one determine what is harmful to minors?
• It's sexual material that is harmful to minors.
• So how does one determine what is harmful to minors?
• It's sexual material that is harmful to minors.

Bills: HB2043, HB2046, HB2126, HB2131, HB2132, HB2133, HB2223, HB2265, HB2411, HB2666

Keywords: felony murder, unborn child, homicide, Arizona Revised Statutes, life imprisonment, death penalty, education, funding, school districts, state aid, education reform, venue, employee conflict, superior court, legal proceedings, workplace disputes, weapons, explosives, trafficking, firearm regulations

Transcript Highlights:

• So school create um invoking harm.
• student, that there is a concrete harm. student, that there is a concrete harm.
• So that's the harm.
• So that's the harm.
• So that's the harm.

Bills: HB0159

Keywords: student rights, free expression, K-12 education, speech protection, religious views, political speech, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the intent to harm is what's required for this crime in 266, but it is not required in 2605.
• wondering if there was an intention wondering if there was an intention intentional intentional
• So<00:39:15.920> the<00:39:16.079> intent<00:39:16.480> to<00:39:16.640> harm
• to harm is what's required So the intent to harm is what's required for<00:39:18.240> the<00:39
• why that was or or not intentional why that was or or not intentional. intentional. intentional.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House convened, suspended its rules to introduce 18 bills by number only, and referred the bills to the appropriate committees. House Bill 647, relating to the Vermont Sister State Program and carrying an appropriation, was referred to Appropriations under House Rule 35A. The chamber also read several resolutions: HR13, concerning support for the people of Palestine and Israel and the end of apartheid, was treated as a bill and referred to Government Operations and Military Affairs; JR88, condemning a U.S. military incursion in Venezuela and calling for withdrawal of U.S. forces, was likewise referred to Government Operations and Military Affairs; and JRS37, supporting gender equality in Nordic combined Olympic competition, was referred to Commerce and Economic Development. JRS39, a weekend adjournment resolution, was adopted in concurrence. On the action calendar, the House passed H541, relating to interference with voters and election officials. It then took up H5, which expands Vermont’s existing hearsay exception for child victims from age 12 and under to age 15 in specified abuse and sexual assault proceedings, with judicial safeguards and a July 1, 2026 effective date. The Judiciary Committee reported the bill favorably 10-1, and the House adopted the committee amendment and ordered third reading. The House also considered H626, a major Judiciary Committee bill on voyeurism, non-consensual disclosure of explicit images, and sexual extortion. Committee members described the bill as updating criminal and civil remedies for image-based abuse, creating a separate sextortion offense, extending criminal statutes of limitation, and clarifying civil recovery for trauma-related harm. During floor debate, members questioned the distinction between the voyeurism and disclosure provisions and the meaning of “reasonable expectation of privacy”; the committee responded with examples and statutory explanations, including that voyeurism covers unlawful recording while the disclosure offense covers later dissemination of images. The bill remained under consideration as the discussion continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• The harm begins at the moment these images are created, unlike revenge porn, which involves harmful distribution
• <00:05:09.440> um critical to understanding the harm um critical to understanding the harm
• revenge porn which involves harmful revenge porn which involves harmful distribution<00:05:16.759
• <00:11:16.760> dissemination requires the intentional dissemination requires the intentional
• responsibility to identify the intent responsibility to identify the intent and<00:11:44.040>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This distorted dynamic is creating three major harms.
• This distorted dynamic is creating three major harms.
• <00:04:26.960> Number<00:04:27.280> one, creating three major harms.
• Number one, creating three major harms.
• if somebody's harmed they can bring<00:29:30.159> action.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• or no intent to violate the law.
• These remedies include the private cause of action, even if there is no intent to deceive or harm, statutory
• they, you can, you don't need harm to bring the action, but you would need some harm to recovery.
• no harm?
• The actual harm. Yes, the actual non-legal harm. Right.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, but much of the meeting focused on House Bill 306, which would require disclosure when a consumer is interacting with a chatbot rather than a human. Sponsor Senator Townsend described it as a consumer protection measure and said the bill is meant to keep pace with rapidly changing AI technology. Committee members and witnesses raised concerns about the bill’s enforcement structure, especially private rights of action and penalties that could apply even without actual consumer harm. The Department of Justice said the bill would apply where the conduct has a Delaware nexus, and that the disclosure requirement is the key consumer protection. Industry witnesses and chambers of commerce opposed the bill as drafted, arguing it would create broad compliance burdens and expose businesses to excessive litigation risk without a harm requirement or clearer safe harbor language. Earlier in the meeting, the committee discussed House Bill 429, which would update Delaware’s step therapy exception process to include biosimilars and interchangeable biologics. Senator Poore and supporters from Highmark and the Department of Insurance said the bill would modernize insurance law, improve access to effective treatments, and reduce costs; they cited national savings from biosimilars and said the bill has agency support. Members asked about Delaware-specific savings, patient switching, and how the process would work, but no vote was taken during the discussion. The committee also heard House Bill 310, which would exclude large data centers from Blue Collar Jobs Act tax credits; the sponsor said the bill is intended to ensure large energy users contribute more to state and local revenues, while supporters and opponents debated competitiveness and community impacts. House Bill 406, on allowing insureds to choose their auto repair shop, and Senate Bill 347, a cleanup bill related to medical debt collection and personal property levies, were also presented without opposition in the hearing. House Bill 253, concerning who may receive letters testamentary or of administration, was described as a cleanup to align statute with existing practice. The committee approved the meeting minutes, but the transcript does not show final votes on the bills discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• home this has created irreversible harm home this has created irreversible harm to<00:27:36.919>
• because it is both an individual harm because it is both an individual harm and<00:31:56.720>
• > harms<00:31:58.159> our<00:31:58.320> state and it harms our society harms our
• state and it harms our society harms our state and<00:31:58.720> so<00:31:59.000> I'm<
• <00:35:21.240> of elements of an intentional of elements of an intentional of intentional<

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What is your intent on including?
• Abortion is harmful to women.
• harm her.
• Therefore, almost all the harmful effects of Tylenol come from improper use, while historically, harmful
• There is hate intended to do harm.

Bills: HB229, HB229, HB3990, HB5082, HB5510

Keywords: HB 229, Texas, political subdivision, local government, county dues, county association, state association of counties, lobbying, lobbyist, public funds, taxpayer lawsuit, injunctive relief, attorney's fees, Government Code Chapter 556, Local Government Code Section 89.002, legislative advocacy, municipal government, county government, city government, special district

Transcript Highlights:

• The type of harm my son experienced was avoidable.
• Terms like ongoing emotional attachment, harmful, and harmful ways are left undefined.
• These are harmful products.
• I think in terms of intentional, intentional discrimination being an element, I think what we are saying
• I think this question of intent.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills related to reproductive access, child safety online, immigration enforcement in schools, health privacy, location data, digital provenance, reparations, and age assurance. AB 54 would protect the medication abortion supply chain and shield providers and others from liability; AB 1137 would strengthen reporting and enforcement tools for child sexual abuse material on social media; AB 49 would limit ICE activity at California public schools; AB 82 would expand privacy and safety protections for gender-affirming care patients and providers; AB 1355 would restrict the collection, use, and sale of precise location data; AB 853 would expand provenance requirements for AI-generated and authentic content; AB 62 would create a pathway for restitution for racially biased eminent domain takings; and AB 1043 would create a device-based age assurance framework for online services. Supporters generally framed the bills as necessary responses to current harms: reproductive rights advocates emphasized California’s role as a safe haven; child safety witnesses described the persistence and re-victimization caused by CSAM online; immigrant rights and education advocates said schools should remain safe from immigration enforcement; health and LGBTQ+ advocates stressed privacy and safety risks tied to tracking and harassment; privacy and consumer groups backed limits on location data and stronger provenance tools; and reparations advocates said AB 62 would help address historic injustices. Opposition came from family policy, tech, business, law enforcement, and industry groups, who raised concerns about safety claims, constitutional issues, implementation burdens, transparency, law enforcement access, and the need to preserve existing privacy frameworks and voluntary standards. The committee members largely expressed support for the policy goals while noting implementation concerns on some measures. Several members asked for or were offered coauthor status on bills. AB 1137, AB 54, AB 49, AB 82, AB 1355, AB 853, and AB 62 all received do-pass votes to Appropriations, with some members voting no or not voting on certain bills. AB 1355 and AB 853 were advanced with amendments or ongoing work promised with opponents, and AB 1043 was presented with discussion of possible amendments on parental consent and age assurance details, though the transcript cuts off before final action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• So you can show some link between the harmed party or the party that's alleging harm and the party that's
• I do believe you have that intent.
• It was an intent to shift the burden of proof.
• That was the intent of the bill.
• But we can at least keep that harm from snowballing.

Bills: HB4922, HB4713, HB4256, HB872, HB1571, HB4266, HB4559, SB251, SB441, SB1719

Keywords: healthcare liability, emergency medical care, standard of proof, negligence, legal reforms, Texas General Arbitration Act, arbitration, binding arbitration, statute of limitations, limitations period, tolling, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Section 16.073, alternative dispute resolution, ADR, civil procedure, lawsuit filing, court jurisdiction, Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence, procedural law

Transcript Highlights:

• entity to come in and abate that harm.
• harms.
• I'm not sure that covers the broad scope of the harm.
• The chairman asked whether the bill defines actual harm and how that harm would be proved.
• This lens in this bill is not to harm the TCPA. This bill is not to harm the TCPA at all.

Bills: HB2242, HB2446, HB2799, HB4502, HB2920, HB2790, HB5620, HB5060, HB5076, HB5080, HB5081, HB5128, HB5130, HB3847, HB5116, HB2969, HB4546, HB4202, HB5624, HB3964, HB4803, HB872, HB4775, HB4777, HB4961, HB5570, HB2988, HB4260, HB1375, HB5009, HB5411, HB5134, HB4388, HB3095, HB1387

Keywords: constables, civil rights, local government, law enforcement, policy-making authority, affidavit, medical bills, civil actions, reasonable charges, healthcare services, judicial statistics, court performance, family law, civil cases, efficiency reporting, court security, emergency management, harassment penalties, judicial safety, court committee

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills affecting civil practice, judicial conduct, and attorney regulation. HB 4961 and the similar HB 3095 would bar uninsured motorists from recovering non-economic damages after a collision, with HB 3095 also addressing certain exceptions and limiting economic damages in some cases. Supporters said the measures would encourage insurance coverage and fairness for insured drivers, while opponents argued they would unfairly punish injured people who were not responsible for the lack of insurance, including pedestrians, passengers, children, and others. HB 3095 drew constitutional concerns from witnesses, and the committee later withdrew the committee substitute and left the bill pending; HB 4961 was also left pending after questions about its scope, including passengers. HB 5570 would expand a continuing legal education exemption to attorneys appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate who serve on boards or commissions. The author and witness said the bill would free up time for public service while still requiring ethics training. A committee member raised a discrepancy in the number of attorneys covered, and the bill was left pending. HB 2969 would prohibit the State Bar from adopting rules or penalties that unreasonably burden attorneys’ religious exercise or free speech, especially in relation to sincerely held religious beliefs. Supporters framed it as a protection for lawyers of faith against an ABA-style speech code, while no one testified in opposition; the bill was left pending. HB 4260 would prohibit county judges and county commissioners from practicing law in courts over which they have jurisdiction. The author described it as an ethics measure to avoid conflicts of interest, but county officials and the County Judges and Commissioners Association opposed it, saying existing ethics rules already address conflicts and that the bill would impose hardships, especially in rural counties. The bill was left pending. HB 4388 would require all judges, including those who serve only in administrative roles, to remain subject to the Code of Judicial Conduct; supporters said some judges avoid discipline by relinquishing judicial functions, while opponents said the bill was unnecessary and could burden county judges who serve as administrators. It was also left pending. The committee also heard HB 5134, which would limit Rule 202 pre-suit depositions to people who have suffered or reasonably expect to suffer actual damages and allow attorney’s fees against abusive petitioners. The author said the bill would curb harassment and fishing expeditions, but members questioned how the standard would work in practice; the bill was left pending. Finally, HB 3964 would narrow common-law public nuisance claims by barring suits over lawful conduct, conduct already addressed by other remedies, and products, while preserving other causes of action. Supporters said the bill would prevent regulation through litigation and protect legislative authority; opponents said it would eliminate important remedies and that no Texas abuse had been shown. The author indicated he would revise the bill, and it was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is somebody with the intent, correct?
• Actually, I believe this is a specific intent crime, if I'm not mistaken, which requires a higher intent
• So it is an actual higher intent than just general intent.
• So it is an actual higher intent than just general intent.
• And when they cause harm, even serious harm, our responses must take that into account.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Patterson's bill would do no harm.
• I do believe that these types of materials cause harm, irrevocable harm to a child, and that's why it's
• harmful content under Texas law.
• It is called harmful content for a reason, because it is harmful.
• Is that your intent, if it is considered harmful material? It has no place. ...in our schools.

Bills: HJR138, HB42, HB 104, HB 129, HB677, HB426, HB668, HB1699, HB2017, HB2128, HB2038, HB3783, HB3717, HB2316, HB3686, HB2563, HB3883, HB4021, HB2788, HB2663, HB3305, HB3173, HB3474, HB 1105, HB3531, HB3490, HB3597, HB 1295, HB3512, HB3010, HB3112, HB4215, HB3223, HB3464, HB3120, HB4214, HB4511, HB3704, HB4081, HB4783, HB4063, HB2783, HB4937, HB5085, HB2510, HB3426, HB4361, HB 1169, HB2516, HB2347, HB4034, HB4700, HB3560, HB5150, HB3860, HB3146, HB3924, HCR98, HCR92, HB1520, HB1545, HB5265, HB1887, HB1914, HB2402, HB2306, HB2350, HB3000, HB3237, HB3326, HB3211, HB 1056, HB2081, HB2187, HB3092, HB3308, HB3526, HB3750, HB4219, HB4230, HB4290, HB5238, HB4804, HB4749, HB245, HB1465, HB294, HB793, HB809, HB3928, HB334, HB2037, HB1973, HB285, HB4341, HB 1043, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB1729, HB2498, HB1314, HB1353, HB3960, HB3923, HB2221, HB2517, HB2518, HB2213, HB5092, HB3748, HB5246, HB4344, HB1482, HB4044, HB2702, HB4264, HB2807, HB2898, HB3181, HB3250, HB2091, HB2115, HB2542, HB2768, HB3349, HB4406, HB1593, HB1899, HB3133, HB3133, HB4960, HB3214, HB2145, HB 1201, HB5061, SB29, SB879, SB65, SB1745, SB412, SB412, SB1746, SB1238, SB1341, SB522, SB1532, SB1378, SB1062, SB2066, SB1963, SB2204, SB1366, SB2077, SB1967, SB1151, HB1618, HB2156, HB2615, HB2615, HB2349, HB1926, HB569, HB1762, HB38, HJR138, HB42, HB 104, HB 104, HB 129, HB677, HB426, HB668, HB1699, HB2017, HB2128, HB2038, HB3783, HB3717, HB2316, HB3686, HB2563, HB3883, HB4021, HB2788, HB2663, HB2663, HB3305, HB3173, HB3474, HB 1105, HB3531, HB3531, HB3490, HB3490, HB3597, HB 1295, HB3512, HB3010, HB3112, HB4215, HB3223, HB3223, HB3464, HB3120, HB4214, HB4511, HB3704, HB4081, HB4783, HB4063, HB2783, HB4937, HB5085, HB2510, HB3426, HB4361, HB 1169, HB2516, HB2347, HB4034, HB4700, HB3560, HB5150, HB3860, HB3146, HB3924, HCR98, HCR92

Keywords: carbon tax, carbon emissions, greenhouse gas, climate policy, fuel tax, emissions tax, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, tax limitation, environmental tax, fossil fuels, energy policy, legislative taxing authority, ballot proposition, constitutional amendment, higher education, funding, financial allocation, state budget, Texas A&M University