HJR 23 proposes a constitutional amendment that would create a statewide initiative and referendum process in Texas. Under the measure, voters could propose new statutes or constitutional amendments by petition, and they could also petition to repeal bills enacted by the Legislature. The resolution sets out detailed procedures for filing, review, signature collection, ballot preparation, and election timing.
For initiatives, the bill requires a $1,000 refundable filing fee, submission to the secretary of state, review by the Texas Legislative Council, and, if the proposal affects state finances, a fiscal note from the Legislative Budget Board. Statutory initiatives would require signatures from at least 5% of voters in each Senate district and 5% statewide based on the most recent governor and state senator elections; constitutional initiatives would require 6% in each Senate district and 6% statewide. Approved statutory initiatives would become law if a majority of voters approve them, while constitutional initiatives would require 55% approval. The bill also limits legislative amendment or repeal of an initiative-enacted statute for five years unless two-thirds of each house votes to change it.
The referendum portion would allow voters to repeal any bill enacted in a regular or special session, including redistricting bills, by petition after final adjournment. Referendum petitions would require a $1,000 refundable filing fee, a filing deadline of 180 days after issuance, and signatures from 5% of voters in each Senate district plus 8% statewide. If approved by a majority of voters, the repeal would take effect immediately upon official declaration, even if the bill had already taken effect. The resolution also adds a constitutional provision stating that the constitution may be amended through the initiative process it creates.
The bill’s impact on state law would be substantial because it would shift part of Texas lawmaking power directly to voters and create new duties for the secretary of state, the Texas Legislative Council, and the Legislative Budget Board. It would establish new petition, ballot, and fiscal-review procedures, impose signature thresholds and deadlines, and create a new constitutional mechanism for both enacting and repealing laws. It would also affect the stability of enacted statutes by limiting legislative changes to voter-approved initiative laws for a five-year period.
No committee transcript or recorded vote information was provided, so there is no documented debate or vote history to gauge sentiment. Based on the text alone, the measure appears designed to expand direct democracy and reduce exclusive legislative control over lawmaking, but it would likely raise concerns about administrative complexity, fiscal review, and the ability of voters to overturn enacted legislation. Notable points of contention would likely include the high signature thresholds, the 55% approval requirement for constitutional initiatives, the five-year supermajority protection for initiative statutes, and the inclusion of redistricting bills within the referendum power.
If adopted, HJR 23 would amend the Texas Constitution to reserve initiative and referendum powers to the people, creating a new direct-democracy process alongside the Legislature’s existing lawmaking authority. It would require the secretary of state, Texas Legislative Council, and Legislative Budget Board to process petitions, review form and constitutionality, and prepare fiscal notes, and it would establish new statutory and constitutional thresholds for petition signatures, ballot placement, and voter approval. It would also constrain the Legislature’s ability to amend or repeal voter-approved initiative statutes for five years absent a two-thirds vote in each chamber.
No committee discussion or vote record was provided, so there is no formal legislative sentiment available from the materials. From the bill text, the measure reflects a pro-initiative, pro-referendum policy approach that would expand voter power over lawmaking. At the same time, the detailed procedural requirements suggest the proposal anticipates concerns about misuse, fiscal impact, and constitutional validity.
Likely points of contention include whether Texas should adopt initiative and referendum at all, how difficult it should be to qualify measures for the ballot, and whether the 55% threshold for constitutional initiatives is appropriate. The bill’s requirement that initiative statutes be insulated from legislative change for five years unless two-thirds of each house agrees may also draw opposition from lawmakers who want to preserve legislative flexibility. In addition, the inclusion of redistricting bills in the referendum power and the involvement of state agencies in fiscal and legal review could be controversial.