Texas House Bill HB 4239

Texas 2025 - 89th Regular

• Filed: 3/10/25

Caption

Relating to providing for a reduction in the total number of state agency rules.

Summary

HB 4239 would require every Texas state agency to count the rules it has in effect by January 1, 2026 and publish that total on its website. Each agency would then have to identify rules equal to 10 percent of that total by April 1, 2026, and repeal those identified rules by July 1, 2026. The bill is temporary: the new section would expire on December 31, 2026. The measure is aimed at reducing the overall volume of agency rules in the Texas administrative code and creating a one-time rule-reduction process across state government. It does not target any single program or agency; instead, it applies broadly to all state agencies subject to rulemaking under Chapter 2001 of the Government Code or other law.

Impact

HB 4239 would amend the Texas Government Code by adding a new Section 2001.008 to Chapter 2001, which governs administrative rulemaking. It would impose new reporting and repeal obligations on state agencies, requiring public disclosure of the total number of active rules and a mandatory 10 percent reduction in those rules within a specified timeframe. The bill would affect all state agencies that adopt rules under state law, and it would temporarily alter how agencies manage their regulatory inventories before expiring at the end of 2026.

Sentiment

Based on the bill’s referral to the Delivery of Government Efficiency committee and the absence of recorded opposition or vote history in the provided materials, the bill appears to be framed as a government-efficiency and deregulation measure. The overall sentiment suggested by the bill text is favorable toward reducing regulatory burden and streamlining agency rulebooks. No committee transcript or vote data is available here to show direct support or opposition from legislators or stakeholders.

Contention

The main point of contention likely concerns the mandatory nature of the 10 percent repeal requirement. Supporters would likely view the bill as a broad efficiency initiative that forces agencies to review outdated or duplicative rules, while critics may argue that a fixed percentage reduction is arbitrary and could lead agencies to repeal useful or necessary rules simply to meet the quota. Another possible concern is the administrative burden of counting, posting, selecting, and repealing rules on a compressed timeline, especially for agencies with large or complex regulatory programs.