Tennessee House Bill HB0673

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/18/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 9 and Title 49, relative to land grant institutions.

Summary

HB0673 requires the Tennessee Higher Education Commission, working with the Department of Finance and Administration, to prepare a report for the General Assembly on state appropriations to each land grant institution in Tennessee. The report must cover the years 1987 through 2020 and present the funding on a per-pupil basis. The report is due to legislators by December 31, 2025. The bill does not directly change funding formulas, eligibility rules, or the operation of any land grant institution. Instead, it creates a one-time reporting requirement intended to compile historical appropriation data and make it easier for lawmakers to review how state support has been distributed over time.

Impact

This bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated Titles 9 and 49 by imposing a new administrative duty on the Tennessee Higher Education Commission and the Department of Finance and Administration. Its practical effect is limited to data collection and reporting, but the resulting report could inform future legislative decisions about higher education appropriations, equity among land grant institutions, and historical funding comparisons. No substantive rights or obligations for students or institutions are directly altered by the bill itself.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of committee discussion or recorded votes, the measure appears neutral and informational rather than controversial. The bill’s purpose is to gather and present fiscal data for legislative review, which typically draws limited opposition because it does not itself appropriate money or change policy. There is no evidence in the available record of organized support or opposition, but the framing suggests a generally practical, oversight-oriented intent.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the available committee transcripts or voting history, because none were provided. If any concerns were to arise, they would likely center on the administrative burden of compiling decades of appropriation data, the methodology used to calculate per-pupil amounts, or how the report might be used in future debates over higher education funding. However, those issues are not reflected in the current record.