Texas House Bill HB 1867

Texas 2025 - 89th Regular

• Filed: 1/15/25

Caption

Relating to tuition and fee exemptions at public institutions of higher education for the siblings of certain military personnel.

Summary

HB 1867 expands an existing tuition and fee exemption at Texas public institutions of higher education to include siblings of certain military personnel. Under current law, the exemption already applies to the spouse or child of qualifying service members; this bill adds siblings for members of the U.S. armed forces and Texas National Guard/Texas Air National Guard who were killed in action, died in service, are missing in action, died from service-connected illness or injury, or are totally and permanently disabled or eligible for individual unemployability due to a service-related injury. The bill also limits sibling eligibility to situations where the service member does not have a spouse or child, and it requires the sibling to be classified as a Texas resident at the time of registration. The changes would apply beginning with tuition and fees charged for the 2025 fall semester, with earlier terms governed by prior law. The bill would amend Section 54.341 of the Education Code and would take effect immediately if passed by a two-thirds vote, or otherwise on September 1, 2025.

Impact

HB 1867 would broaden the scope of Texas’s higher-education tuition exemption statute by extending benefits to a new class of relatives: siblings of certain deceased or disabled military members and National Guard members. It would modify Section 54.341 of the Education Code and affect public institutions of higher education by requiring them to honor the exemption for eligible siblings under the bill’s conditions, while preserving existing residency and eligibility requirements. The practical effect is to increase access to reduced-cost college attendance for some military families and potentially increase foregone tuition revenue for affected institutions.

Sentiment

The available context shows no recorded committee testimony or floor votes, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s subject matter and narrow eligibility criteria, the measure appears to be framed as a targeted veterans’ and military-family benefit rather than a broad policy change. The referral to the Higher Education committees in both chambers suggests it was treated as a standard higher-education eligibility bill.

Contention

The main policy questions raised by the text are who should qualify for the exemption and under what family circumstances. The bill extends benefits to siblings only when the service member has no spouse or child, which limits the expansion and may reflect an effort to prioritize closer dependents first. Potential points of contention could include the fiscal impact on institutions, whether sibling eligibility should be conditioned on the absence of a spouse or child, and whether the residency requirement is appropriate for this benefit, but no specific opposition is documented in the provided record.