Transcript Highlights:

• , county, and district attorneys. to prosecute election fraud offenses in the state of Texas. 51 52 Mortar
• And if there's an obstruction of distribution of election supplies, it increases it to state jail felony
• contest was sustained, which is the only. overturn of an election in the United States that I'm aware
• across our state, making the voting process more difficult for both voters and election officials.
• When citizens elect their representatives, whether it's their state senator or their county judge, and

Bills: SB108, SB318, SB507, SB511, SB533, SB1026, SB1386, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596

Keywords: elections, Election Code, poll workers, election clerks, presiding judge, alternate presiding judge, polling place, central counting station, county chair, political party, gubernatorial election, vote counting, election administration, Texas elections, precinct officials, ballot counting, county election officials, election integrity, election fraud, Attorney General

Transcript Highlights:

• As the senator stated, you still would be on an SBR in particular.
• Do you know how many states and which either have heavily regulate or prohibit these?
• I can tell you I think there's nine that specifically ban under state law SBRs.
• But all 50 states and territories ban SBRs unless you have a tax stamp.
• Hearing none, the Senate Committee on State.

Bills: SB108, SB318, SB507, SB511, SB533, SB1026, SB1386, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596

Keywords: elections, Election Code, poll workers, election clerks, presiding judge, alternate presiding judge, polling place, central counting station, county chair, political party, gubernatorial election, vote counting, election administration, Texas elections, precinct officials, ballot counting, county election officials, election integrity, election fraud, Attorney General

Transcript Highlights:

• But under state law, whether you paid or not, it would not be illegal. OK. Thanks.
• And so this is in preparation of what might occur, as the senator stated.
• And so this is in preparation of what might occur, as the senator stated.
• I can tell you, I think there's 9 that specifically ban under state law SBRs, but all 50 states and territories
• the same states that just ban any semiautomatic AR-15-type rifle.

Bills: SB108, SB318, SB507, SB511, SB533, SB1026, SB1386, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596

Keywords: elections, Election Code, poll workers, election clerks, presiding judge, alternate presiding judge, polling place, central counting station, county chair, political party, gubernatorial election, vote counting, election administration, Texas elections, precinct officials, ballot counting, county election officials, election integrity, election fraud, Attorney General

Summary: The committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 1596, which would remove short-barreled rifles from the list of prohibited weapons in the Texas Penal Code. The author, Sen. Hagenbuch, said the bill would align state law with federal realities and argued that the current prohibition is arbitrary and unnecessary. Supporters, including representatives from Gun Owners of America and Texas Gun Rights, said the bill would reduce confusion, protect lawful gun owners, and preserve the ability to use shorter firearms for self-defense, hunting, and for smaller shooters. One supporter also described a recent case in which an AR pistol was mistaken for a short-barreled rifle and led to a state charge that was later dismissed. Public testimony was split. Supporters said stabilizing braces and shorter firearms can improve accuracy, safety, and accessibility for women, children, and smaller-statured shooters. Opponents, including Texas Gun Sense and two Santa Fe shooting survivors, argued that short-barreled firearms are more concealable and dangerous, and pointed to the 2018 Santa Fe High School shooting as evidence of the risks of easier access. They urged the committee to keep the existing restrictions in place to protect public safety. After public testimony closed, the committee took up pending business. Senate Bill 1505, relating to the Compassionate Use Program, was reported favorably to the full Senate on an 8-0 vote. Senate Bill 17, relating to the acquisition of real property by certain aliens or foreign entities, was first amended by adopting a committee substitute and then reported favorably to the full Senate by a 7-1 vote. The committee then recessed until after the Senate’s adjournment or final recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 1470 is a simple bill to allow the Secretary of State to obtain data from DPS regarding cross-state
• There are resource witnesses from DPS and the Secretary of State. ...for the Secretary of State to use
• As you mentioned, this is a rare system among the states. Most states have one single high court.
• The only other state that has two high courts is Oklahoma.
• State your name and position. My name is Allen Place.

Bills: SB16, SB76, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB827, SB964, SB1209, SB1210, SB1386, SB1470, SB2035, SJR37

Keywords: voter registration, proof of citizenship, Election Code, criminal offenses, limited federal ballot, transportation, infrastructure, funding, public safety, state regulation, election, polling places, voter access, state oversight, electronic voting, voting, polling place, elections, countywide program, election integrity

Summary: The Senate Committee on State Affairs met and heard several bills related to legislative process and court jurisdiction. Senate Bill 1386, by Senator Huffman, would change compelled legislative testimony from blanket transactional immunity to testimonial immunity, allowing compelled statements or documents to be used against a witness in criminal prosecution only if not derived from the compelled testimony, while preserving protection against perjury and false statements and retaining the right to counsel. No public witnesses testified, and the bill was left pending. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1470, by Chairman Hughes, which would require DPS to share existing data on cross-state driver’s license cancellations with the Secretary of State for voter-roll maintenance. Hughes said the bill does not create new data collection and is intended to improve list maintenance. A DPS resource witness was present, there was no substantive opposition, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1210, also by Hughes, would address conflicts between the Texas Supreme Court and the Court of Criminal Appeals on constitutional questions by making the Supreme Court the final arbiter in limited circumstances. Chris Hilton supported the bill, but Allen Place, Jack Rohde, and Philip Furlow opposed it, arguing it was unconstitutional, unnecessary, and could create practical problems in criminal post-conviction litigation. The bill was left pending after testimony. The committee also heard Senate Bill 311, which would conform the Government Code to the Texas Constitution by clarifying the Supreme Court’s original writ authority against lower courts and officials other than the governor. Justice Evan Young and Chris Hilton supported the bill as a clarification of existing authority, while no one testified against it; the bill was left pending. The committee then recessed to allow the chamber to rearrange for the Senate session.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the Director of Elections for the Texas Secretary of State.
• not vote in any election. within the state of Texas.
• . citizens United States citizens may vote in the Texas elections.
• But an election adviser... That's a re-opinion from the Secretary of State. It is not binding.
• Texas election code 122.001 clearly states that voting must be private.

Bills: SB16, SB76, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB827, SB964, SB1209, SB1210, SB1386, SB1470, SB2035, SJR37, SB 16

Keywords: voter registration, proof of citizenship, Election Code, criminal offenses, limited federal ballot, transportation, infrastructure, funding, public safety, state regulation, election, polling places, voter access, state oversight, electronic voting, voting, polling place, elections, countywide program, election integrity

Transcript Highlights:

• Good morning, Senate Committee on State Affairs. Affairs will come to order.
• from DPS regarding cross state moves.
• This is very good, possibly the best data for cross state moves.
• most states have one single high court the only other state that has two high courts is Oklahoma.
• State your name and position. My name is Alan Place. I'm here on behalf.

Bills: SB16, SB76, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB827, SB964, SB1209, SB1210, SB1386, SB1470, SB2035, SJR37, SB 16

Keywords: voter registration, proof of citizenship, Election Code, criminal offenses, limited federal ballot, transportation, infrastructure, funding, public safety, state regulation, election, polling places, voter access, state oversight, electronic voting, voting, polling place, elections, countywide program, election integrity

Bills: HB117, HB228, HB250, HB260, HB393, HB400, HB446, HB534, HB551, HB576, HB842

Keywords: Department of State, statutory entities, re-creation, termination, Louisiana laws, Department of State Civil Service, Louisiana legislation, government re-creation, authority termination, financial disclosure, public servants, ethics, immediate family, transparency, legislators, transportation, foreign travel, cultural exchange, public service, HB393

Transcript Highlights:

• So State Republican Executive Committee, Election Integrity, and Secure Texas Elections.
• Johnson, if someone hasn't voted in two general elections, maybe they've moved out of the state.
• a primary election that regularly reoccurs at fixed states.
• Again, they could vote in the state and federal elections, or they could vote like my son does.
• and national elections. ...of local control without preventing participation in state and national elections

Bills: HB1968, HB2279, HB2739, HB2803, HB3909, HB3918, HB4253, HB4475, HB5115, HB5430

Keywords: election services, contracting, political subdivisions, county elections, election code, voter registration, citizenship status, election law, cancellation, disqualification, Texas Election Code, voter identification, registration, election integrity, identification documents, election, watcher, polling place, removal, Texas Elections Code

Summary: The committee first voted out two previously heard Senate bills without amendment: SB 688, relating to the date of the meeting of presidential electors, and SB 914, relating to authorizing certain cities to change the date of their general election for officers. Both motions passed on 8-0 votes with one member absent. The committee then heard HB 3909, which would change the current prohibition on wireless device use from a 100-foot boundary around a voting station to only inside the room where voting is taking place, with a committee substitute also adding state-prescribed signage. The author and supporters said the change would reduce confusion and make enforcement easier for election workers, while opponents argued the existing 100-foot rule helps prevent electioneering, recording, and possible technical interference with election equipment. The bill was left pending. Members also heard HB 1968, which would repeal a provision that requires counties to provide election services to certain political subdivisions in odd-numbered years but not even-numbered years, making county-provided election services consistent across years. Supporters said it would improve consistency for smaller cities and school districts, while opponents warned it could strain county equipment and staffing during heavy election cycles. The bill was left pending. HB 2279 would require voter registrars to remove a person from the rolls if the person swears under oath during jury service that they are not a U.S. citizen; supporters said this would streamline removal of ineligible voters, while opponents raised concerns about mistaken identity and loss of due process. The bill was left pending. Finally, the committee heard HB 2803, which would require a presiding judge to give a poll watcher a signed statement explaining any removal from service. Supporters said this would improve documentation and accountability, and one witness asked for clarification that improper removal would remain a criminal offense; the author said he would consider a floor amendment and further discussion. The committee also heard HB 4253, which would create a more uniform voter-roll maintenance process based on inactivity, sending confirmation notices to voters who have not voted in the prior 25 months and eventually removing those who do not respond after multiple election cycles. Supporters said it would clean up outdated records and help keep voters registered where they actually live, while opponents argued it could wrongly remove eligible voters who simply do not vote regularly. HB 4253 was left pending as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• The existing law in state statute provided a deadline by which cities had to elect to move elections
• After that deadline, this moves in state statute the date for elections to later this year, December
• In the central counting station, we don't have an alternate judge in non-general elections for state
• Garcia decided to send out a letter prior to early voting and election day, stating that the presiding
• of State to monitor elections in that county for the following two years. ...along with coordinating

Bills: HB3097, HB3691, SB108, SB827, SB1541, SB1862, SB2166, SB2216

Keywords: Texas elections, Election Code, uniform election date, November election, local elections, political subdivisions, general election date, election administration, municipal utility district, county elections, local government, ballot scheduling, candidate filing, voter turnout, election calendar, HB 3097, early voting, electronic application, mail-in ballot, voting accessibility

Transcript Highlights:

• I shortened it for you after the last couple of times, so it's State Republican Executive Committee election
• state.
• . elections or any election between those elections.
• election security.
• in our election system.

Bills: HB1968, HB2279, HB2739, HB2803, HB3909, HB3918, HB4253, HB4475, HB5115, HB5430

Keywords: election services, contracting, political subdivisions, county elections, election code, voter registration, citizenship status, election law, cancellation, disqualification, Texas Election Code, voter identification, registration, election integrity, identification documents, election, watcher, polling place, removal, Texas Elections Code

Bills: HB429, HB496, HB640, HB657, HB665, HB677, HB952

Keywords: Texas Election Code, elections, voting station, polling place, ballot marking, ballot reading, child accompaniment, minor, parental supervision, voter education, secretary of state, county election administrator, voter assistance, election administration, poll worker rules, ballot secrecy, HB 496, ballot option, none of the above, abstain from vote

Transcript Highlights:

• , general elections.
• And then things that aren't elections, but like county conventions, to see who goes to the state conventions
• Sex is not a state.
• We're the State Chamber for the state of Texas. throughout the great state of Texas. extraordinary leadership
• Or the state that has become the economic engine of the United States of America? Mr.

Bills: SB29, SB406, SB447, SB875, SB893, SB1033, SB1346, SB1362, SB1539, SCR22, SB 29

Keywords: business organization, internal management, corporate governance, partnerships, liability reduction, birth certificate, biological sex, gender identity, health and safety, sex assignment, SB 875, Texas, independent school district, ISD, school board trustee, superintendent, campus administrator, electioneering, political signs, early voting

Transcript Highlights:

• If you would state your name for the record, who you're with and your position on the bill.
• Could you state your name for the record, who you're with and your position on the bill, and you may
• Chair: State and they give their time and effort, it's a hard job and this is just the right thing to
• Chair: If you would state your name for the record, who you're with, and your position on the bill.
• And just want to add, we are trending in the wrong direction in this state.

Bills: HB50

Keywords: constitutional amendment, ballot language, fiscal note, fiscal impact, cost estimate, savings estimate, Legislative Budget Board, LBB, secretary of state, Election Code, Government Code, voter information, ballot proposition, state budget, election administration, Texas

Transcript Highlights:

• But I think we could, couldn't we pass 17 for state elections?
• Texas non-citizen voting in state or local elections.
• To go against their state law and have non-citizens voting in local elections.
• States and other state models? Yes, Florida has been doing this for several election cycles.
• In a local election or a state election, the voter would be 100% disenfranchised. ...disenfranchised,

Bills: HB2442, HB3697, HB4288, HB5256, HB5337, HB5362, HJR161

Keywords: HB 2442, Texas Election Code, Election Code Section 84.001, early voting, ballot by mail, mail ballot, absentee voting, runoff election, primary runoff, general runoff, voter application, election administration, county election officials, opt-out, voter choice, mail voting, ballot application, voting by mail, Election Code, size requirements

Transcript Highlights:

• If you would, please state your name for the record along with your position on the bill.
• Could you state your name for the record, who you're with, and your position on the bill?
• Yes, ma'am, you used to be my state senator, so thank you very much.
• If you would, state your name for the record, your position on the bill, and you may begin.
• I just want to add that we are trending in the wrong direction in this state.

Bills: HB50

Keywords: constitutional amendment, ballot language, fiscal note, fiscal impact, cost estimate, savings estimate, Legislative Budget Board, LBB, secretary of state, Election Code, Government Code, voter information, ballot proposition, state budget, election administration, Texas, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There's a general enforcement mechanism with the Secretary of State over election administration, correct
• The ruling held that federal election statutes per... ...state laws which permitted the receipt of ballots
• Boomer, and the court found that as long as the state continued to receive ballots, the election was
• Just as Kavanaugh emphasized, to state the obvious, a state cannot conduct an election without deadlines
• The law states that if we're going to have an Election Day, the ballots have to be in by the close of

Bills: HB2139, HB2253, HB3632, HB4171, HB4309, HB4508, SB760, SB1470

Keywords: voting access, polling place, disability, caretaker provisions, ballot delivery, election code, HB 2253, Texas Election Code, bond election, bond issuance, local government, election cancellation, disaster declaration, natural disaster, emergency election, county election officer, polling place notice, open meeting, election workers, voter safety

Transcript Highlights:

• The DPS and Secretary of State should be required to check voter data against other states and legislation
• It happens all over the state. These are not elections.
• district or state rep.
• They elect at a county convention and then a state convention.
• State code allows for filing at the state party. There's not a county one.

Bills: HB2139, HB2253, HB3632, HB4171, HB4309, HB4508, SB760, SB1470

Keywords: voting access, polling place, disability, caretaker provisions, ballot delivery, election code, HB 2253, Texas Election Code, bond election, bond issuance, local government, election cancellation, disaster declaration, natural disaster, emergency election, county election officer, polling place notice, open meeting, election workers, voter safety

Transcript Highlights:

• , state, and local elections in November.
• The reality is that voter turnout is substantially higher in high-profile federal and state elections
• May election that doesn't contain state and county officers.
• audit the election enabling in 50 states to go back and audit the election system, which is why the
• It would let the Secretary of State effectively remove election duties from locally appointed election

Bills: HB311, SB447, SB505, SB2217, SB2753

Keywords: voter registration, electronic, Texas election law, Signature verification, DPS, internet application, Texas Election Code, signature verification, online application, data security, electronic application, Department of Public Safety, information security, electronic voter registration, voting technology, voter access, state election laws, digital signature, election irregularities, audit

Summary: The committee heard several election-related bills. SB 447 would let the City of Mission in Hidalgo County permanently move its municipal elections from May to the uniform November election date if it chooses. The bill was described as permissive and intended to increase turnout and reduce costs. Mission’s mayor testified in support, saying voters had already approved the change by a wide margin in a charter amendment election. The bill was left pending after no objection. SB 2217 focused on standardizing election data reporting and reconciliation across counties to improve transparency and comparability. Testimony was generally supportive of the goal, but Dr. Laura Presley and others flagged technical issues, including a discrepancy between a three-ballot mismatch threshold in existing law and a 1% threshold in part of the bill, plus a definition issue involving central accumulators. Supporters said consistent auditing and reconciliation would help election integrity, while the bill was also left pending. The committee then took up SB 2753, a major proposal to create a continuous in-person voting period that would combine early voting and Election Day into one uninterrupted process, with precinct consolidation and other changes. Supporters said it could simplify administration, reduce equipment changes, and improve security by using one set of machines. Opponents and neutral witnesses raised concerns about cost, staffing, ballot security, reporting changes, weekend voting, and whether the bill was ready for implementation; several urged a pilot or study instead. The committee substitute was withdrawn and the bill was left pending. SB 505 would create a process for election workers, candidates, party officials, and measure proponents or opponents to request explanations of election irregularities, with escalation to the Secretary of State for audit or enforcement if responses were unsatisfactory. Supporters said it would provide a way to resolve irregularities and restore confidence, while opponents argued it was too broad, lacked guardrails against abuse, and could be used by partisan actors to pressure counties. The bill was left pending. Finally, HB 311 would expand Texas’s online voter registration system to first-time registrants and others, with supporters citing efficiency, lower costs, and broader access, and opponents raising concerns about signature verification and implementation details. Testimony was cut short because of the session deadline, and the bill had not been disposed of in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• , state, and local elections in November.
• The reality is that voter turnout is substantially higher in high-profile federal and state elections
• May election that doesn't contain state and county officers.
• May election that doesn't contain state and county officers.
• The state has a set group of attorneys. And they all have attorneys on Election Day.

Bills: HB311, SB447, SB505, SB2217, SB2753

Keywords: voter registration, electronic, Texas election law, Signature verification, DPS, internet application, Texas Election Code, signature verification, online application, data security, electronic application, Department of Public Safety, information security, electronic voter registration, voting technology, voter access, state election laws, digital signature, election irregularities, audit

Summary: The House Committee on Elections met with a quorum present and heard several election-related bills, with public testimony limited to two minutes per witness. The first measure, SB 447, would allow the City of Mission to move its municipal elections from May to November on a one-time, permanent basis. Supporters, including Mission’s mayor, said voters had already approved the change by a wide margin and argued it would improve turnout and reduce costs. The bill was left pending after no objection. The committee then heard SB 2217, which was described as a transparency measure to standardize election data reporting and reconciliation across counties. Testimony focused on a technical issue involving discrepancy thresholds for electronic voting system reconciliation, with one witness urging the bill be aligned with existing law’s “more than 3” standard rather than a 1% threshold, and another suggesting a definition fix. The bill was left pending. Members also heard SB 2753, a major proposal to create a continuous in-person voting period by combining early voting and election day into one uninterrupted period, with a committee substitute making it a pilot and permissive. Supporters said it could simplify administration and improve security, while opponents warned it would increase costs, require more staffing and equipment, delay results, and create logistical problems for counties. The committee substitute was withdrawn and the bill was left pending. Finally, SB 505 would let certain election stakeholders request explanations of irregularities from election officials and, if unresolved, escalate the matter to the Secretary of State for audit or possible conservatorship. Supporters framed it as a tool for accountability and transparency, while opponents called it overly broad and vulnerable to abuse. The bill was left pending. The committee also took up HB 311, which would expand online voter registration to first-time registrants and direct state agencies to develop a pathway for Texans without a driver’s license to register online. Supporters argued it would modernize the process, reduce errors, and save money, while opponents said first-time applicants still need a wet signature and raised concerns about signature verification and implementation. Due to the late hour and floor deadline, testimony was cut off, the names of remaining witnesses were read into the record, and the bill was left pending before the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate Judiciary and Elections Committee is called to order.
• To prohibit it from influencing elections and election officials. Okay, thanks. Madam Chair? Yes.
• They don't consider it an election, essentially.
• the weekend before Election Day.
• The causal factor of both findings to the 2020 presidential election, when a Republican election denier

Bills: SB1285, SB1289, SB1326, SB1328, SB1329, SB1330, SB1392, SB1402, SB1425, SCR1013, SCR1014

Keywords: sentencing, correctional facilities, multiple sentences, death penalty, aggravating circumstances, juvenile offenses, class 2 felony, foreign donations, election administration, certification, Arizona Revised Statutes, transparency, public disclosure, victims' rights, attorney fees, government accountability, right to counsel, legal representation, parents' rights, family law

Summary: The committee approved the minutes and then took up several election, family court, and criminal justice bills. SB 1425, the “big bill,” would move Arizona’s 2026 primary election date earlier and adjust related election administration timelines; the chair’s amendment moved the primary to July 21 and removed the shortened curing/ID deadlines. County officials testified in support, explaining the timing changes and the need to align dates, and the committee adopted the amendment and gave the bill a do-pass recommendation. SB 1289, dealing with certifications for entities providing money or resources for election administration and foreign funding disclosures, also received a do-pass recommendation after testimony from supporters arguing it would block foreign influence in election administration and ballot issue spending. The committee later heard SCR 1013, a related resolution that would more directly prohibit foreign-source money for election administration and ballot measures; the sponsor and supporters said it was similar to SB 1289 but broader, and testimony focused on foreign money flowing through nonprofit networks. The committee then considered SB 1326, which would allow courts to award attorney fees and costs to victims when a party violates or worsens a victim’s rights. A victim’s attorney testified that the bill would provide needed accountability and guidance, while opponents argued the term “exacerbates” was vague and that existing remedies already exist. The committee approved SB 1326 on a 4-3 vote. SB 1402, requiring courts to impose a fee on certain probationers to cover electronic monitoring costs, drew support from the sponsor and advocates who said offenders should pay for monitoring, and opposition from defense attorneys who warned it could burden indigent probationers and divert money from treatment; it also received a 4-3 do-pass recommendation. The most extensive debate was on SB 1330, which would allow a parent in certain custody cases to request a jury trial on parenting time or legal decision-making. Supporters, including several parents, described costly and traumatic family court experiences and argued a jury would provide a neutral check on judges and court-appointed professionals. County and court representatives opposed the bill, saying family cases require specialized judicial expertise, jury trials would delay urgent matters, increase costs, and risk confidentiality. Despite those concerns, the committee adopted the bill on a 4-3 vote. The committee also approved SB 1328, which declares state policy favoring parental rights and a child’s equal access to both co-parents, after adopting an amendment adding legislative intent language. Finally, SB 1329, which would let parents sue court-appointed professionals who deviate from professional ethics or standards in custody matters, passed 4-3 after testimony from parents and advocates who said court appointees lack accountability, while opponents said existing malpractice and licensing remedies already address misconduct.