Tennessee House Bill HB2095

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26
• Refer: 2/5/26
• Refer: 2/18/26
• Refer: 3/31/26
• Refer: 4/6/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 43, Chapter 6, Part 5 and Title 49, relative to higher education.

Summary

HB2095 is a broad higher education measure that revises several parts of Tennessee law governing student aid, transfer pathways, institutional reporting, and related administrative rules. It updates the Tennessee student assistance program by redefining eligible institutions and programs, tying aid eligibility more closely to FAFSA data and financial need, requiring U.S. citizens to receive priority, and directing TSAC to pay awards to institutions for credit to student accounts. It also sets rules for renewal, revocation for false information, and compliance-based restrictions on institutions participating in state aid programs. The bill also makes major changes to the Tennessee HOPE scholarship and transfer policy. It requires continuous enrollment for HOPE recipients except for approved leaves, limits the duration of eligibility, and expands statewide transfer pathway requirements so public institutions must develop pathways for high-demand majors. Those pathways must include a common 41-hour general education core and 19 hours of major-related coursework, be reviewed every five years, and support common course numbering, dual admissions, and clearer transfer information. The bill further authorizes the commission to designate transfer-focused institutions, expands reporting and data-sharing duties, and adds apprenticeship-related education to an exemption from certain higher education provisions. In addition to the higher education changes, the bill preserves and updates a black fly suppression program administered by the University of Tennessee in the Greenbrier Valley and areas adjacent to the Pigeon River, with required study of biological and socioeconomic effects. Several sections are repealed or reorganized, and some provisions take effect immediately while most others take effect July 1, 2026. Overall, the bill would significantly reshape Tennessee’s student aid administration and transfer framework while also affecting a limited environmental/public health program. The general sentiment reflected in the committee votes is strongly favorable. The bill advanced unanimously in the House Higher Education Subcommittee and House Education Committee, and it passed the House Government Operations Committee with only one dissenting vote. That pattern suggests broad support for the bill’s higher education reforms, especially the transfer and financial aid provisions. The main points of potential contention appear to be the scope and rigidity of the higher education changes, particularly the continuous enrollment requirement for HOPE scholarship students, the state’s increased control over institutional compliance with aid rules, and the detailed statewide transfer mandates imposed on colleges and universities. The bill also narrows or restructures eligibility in some aid programs and gives priority to U.S. citizens, which could draw policy debate even though the recorded committee votes show little opposition.

Impact

HB2095 would amend Tennessee’s higher education statutes in Title 49 and a related environmental/public health provision in Title 43. It would expand TSAC’s rulemaking and enforcement authority over state financial aid, revise eligibility and administration for Tennessee student assistance awards, modify HOPE scholarship duration and enrollment requirements, and create more detailed statewide transfer-pathway, articulation, and reporting obligations for public higher education institutions. It also preserves the University of Tennessee’s black fly suppression program and adds an apprenticeship-related exemption affecting higher education regulation.

Sentiment

The recorded committee action indicates broad support for the bill. It received unanimous approval in two House committees and passed a third committee with only one no vote, suggesting the measure was generally viewed favorably by legislators reviewing it. The available record does not include transcript debate, so the sentiment can be inferred mainly from the strong vote margins and lack of visible organized opposition.

Contention

The likely areas of contention are the bill’s tighter administration of student aid and scholarship eligibility, especially the continuous enrollment requirement for HOPE recipients, the financial-need thresholds, and TSAC’s authority to restrict institutions for noncompliance. The transfer-pathway mandates may also be debated by higher education stakeholders because they require common course numbering, standardized transfer blocks, dual admissions, and recurring review of pathways. Although the bill passed with little recorded opposition, these provisions affect institutional autonomy, student eligibility, and statewide coordination, which are the most plausible sources of disagreement.