The Legislative Ranger
HB 195-209
11/26/2026
By: Stephen O’Toole
The Texas Legislature is once again a battleground for contentious bills, with proposals that could significantly reshape public education, healthcare, unemployment benefits, district attorney compensation, and even the way Texans vote in federal elections. From hyperpartisan initiatives aimed at embedding specific ideologies into school curriculums to measures that threaten voter access and economic protections, these bills reveal deep political divides and raise serious questions about their potential impact on everyday Texans. Let’s dive into the details, starting with legislation that could fundamentally alter the state's approach to teaching, healthcare, and governance.
An old fairy tale common to tell young children about where babies come from is to tell them of the stork. Many of the children impacted by HB196 could still believe in this tale.
HB196 is a hyper-political bill that seeks to indoctrinate children, ensuring that the next generation aligns with the beliefs the legislation aims to promote. Authored by Rep. Cody Vasut [R-Angleton], this bill proposes a single, unambiguous addition to the Texas Education Code, requiring that K-12 public schools teach students “that human life begins at conception and has inherent dignity and immeasurable worth from the moment of conception.” This addition places the topic on par with subjects like physical education, making it mandatory for all students and introduced at an early age. I find this deeply concerning, as many children in elementary school, particularly in younger grades, lack the understanding or maturity to engage with such a sensitive and divisive topic. Regardless of personal beliefs about when life begins, it is inappropriate for the government to force this issue into the curriculum of kindergarten and early elementary students. This bill exemplifies governmental overreach, blatantly attempting to shape the next generation’s worldview from an early age in alignment with Rep. Vasut’s agenda. I rate this bill as highly dangerous and a top priority to fight.
HB197, authored by Rep. John Bucy [D-Round Rock], is another partisan bill but one with significant potential to address healthcare gaps in Texas by expanding Medicaid eligibility. Currently, Texas excludes childless adults from Medicaid entirely and sets the eligibility threshold for parents and caretaker relatives at just 17% of the Federal Poverty Line (FPL)—approximately $3,500 annually for a family of three. This bill seeks to raise eligibility to 138% of the FPL, or about $20,100 annually for childless adults and $34,300 annually for a family of three. This expansion would provide crucial access to healthcare for individuals who are currently shut out of the system, addressing a glaring gap in support for low-income Texans. While debate over Medicaid expansion often centers on financial concerns, the current thresholds are indefensible in their inadequacy. I do not have exact figures on how many people would gain Medicaid eligibility under this bill, but the impact would undoubtedly be significant for some of the most vulnerable populations. I rate this bill as low danger and high priority to pass.
HB199 is a bill aiming to reduce unemployment benefits on a sliding scale based on the state’s unemployment rate, authored by Rep. Mano DeAyala [R-Houston]. At first glance, the concept of adjusting benefits to reflect economic conditions may seem reasonable, but this bill significantly reduces protections for unemployed Texans. Currently, unemployment benefits are capped at 26 weeks across the board. Under this bill, the maximum would extend to 27 weeks only if unemployment exceeds 10%, with benefits shrinking incrementally as the unemployment rate falls. For instance, at a rate of 9.6%-10%, benefits would max out at 21 weeks, and if unemployment drops below 6.5%—where Texas has been since mid-2021—benefits would bottom out at just 14 weeks. This drastic reduction would leave many Texans without adequate support during job searches, particularly as unemployment benefits are already insufficient to live on, maxing out at $591 weekly. Additionally, the bill ties benefit adjustments to quarterly unemployment reports and the claimant’s eligibility year, potentially locking individuals into outdated rates during economic downturns. Imagine if this bill had been in effect during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic: individuals laid off in March 2020 could have had their benefits determined by pre-crisis rates from December 2019-February 2020. While I support the idea of scaling benefits to provide more aid in times of economic hardship, this bill takes the opposite approach, making it punitive rather than supportive. I rate this bill as highly dangerous and a top priority to fight.
HB204, authored by Rep. Carl Tepper [R-Lubbock], is a blatantly partisan measure designed to favor district attorneys in smaller, predominantly Republican counties. Currently, DA salaries are capped at the maximum base salary of equivalent district judges. This bill introduces an exception, removing the cap for DAs serving counties with populations under 400,000. There are 13 counties in Texas with populations exceeding this threshold, from Harris County (4.8 million) to Cameron County (426,710), collectively housing approximately 86% of the state’s Democratic voters and most Democratic DAs. By selectively boosting compensation for DAs in smaller counties, this bill creates a two-tiered system, benefiting Republican-aligned areas while penalizing Democratic strongholds. Such divisive, partisan policies erode public trust and turn people away from politics. I rate this bill as low danger but moderate priority to fight due to its clear attempt to introduce bias into public service compensation.
HB209 is another hyper-partisan bill, authored by Rep. Mike Schofield [R-Katy], that seeks to decouple federal elections for U.S. Senators and Representatives from state and local elections, requiring separate voter registrations for each. This bill explicitly creates a second voter registry, mandating that citizens register separately to vote in federal elections. While the bill specifies that, to the extent feasible, state and federal elections should remain concurrent and in the same location, the administrative burden of separate registrations would disproportionately affect low-income voters and those with disabilities. Additionally, the bill opens the door to potential future disparities in voter eligibility requirements between state and federal elections, setting the stage for a bifurcated system that could disenfranchise voters from one election type or the other. At a time when many are advocating for automatic voter registration to simplify voting access, this bill imposes unnecessary hurdles and complicates the voting process. Such measures undermine voter rights and disproportionately impact those who already face barriers to participation. I rate this bill as highly dangerous to voter access and a high priority to fight against.
As the Legislative Ranger, I’ve laid bare the intent and potential consequences of these bills—some designed to serve, others crafted to control, and a few poised to undermine the rights and freedoms of Texans. These are not just words on paper; they are strategies to shape our lives, our communities, and our future. From indoctrination in classrooms to attempts to suppress voter access, these proposals demand our attention and action. Below, I’ve scouted out additional, less impactful bills for you to consider. Stay informed, stay vigilant, and let’s hold the line together!
HB195 – authored by Rep. Mihaela Plesa [D-Plano] is a bill mandating for school districts to have how the property taxes are spent available online. This is only high level reporting mandated, so of minimal effect but still nice to have.
HB198 – authored by Rep. Ben Bumgarner [R-Roanoke] is a no nonsense bill that simply seeks to protect our Firefighters by providing them no-cost cancer screenings at their fifth year of service and every third year after that.
HB201 – authored by Rep. Mary Perez [D- Pasadena] is a lengthy bill that does very little, but that is not to say it is not important. It is lengthy because it is modifying definitions of motor fuel theft and credit card shimmer as well as setting them as fraud under the jurisdiction of the financial crimes intelligence center.
HB202 – authored by Rep. William Metcalf [R-Conroe] that seeks to make limitations on property tax increases permanent. It will take the restriction of a cap of 20% increase from 2024, 2025, and 2026 and make no longer expire. I have previously stated my opinions on property tax limitations being bad on wealth gap, I will not beat a dead horse.
HB203 – authored by Rep. Vikki Goodwin [D-Austin] that also addresses limits on increases to property taxes, but this one seeks to place a cap on increases on properties that are leased or rented at or below fair market value for the area to try and encourage better rent prices.
HB205 – authored by Rep. Philip Cortez [D-San Antonio] that simply adds some priority exceptions to grants for alternative fueling facilities. This bill seeks to make it easier for grants to be applied where most useful.
HB206 – authored by Rep. Tom Craddick [R-Midland] that I would swear was written by a businessman who owns a pipeline construction company. This bill simply removes a county’s authority to require a cash bond from one of these company’s as a guarantee of work unless the company owner approves of the use of the bonds paid.
HB207 – authored by Rep. Ryan Guillen [R-Rio Grande City] that I actually agree with. This is a simple bill to extend the penal code’s protections of minor’s likeness being used in pornographic manners to include anatomically correct doll, mannequin, or robot that has the features of a child and that is intended for sexual uses.
HB208 – authored by Rep. Caroline Harris Davila [R-Round Rock] is a simple bill that seeks to expand the options a patient has to receive an itemized bill. Currently law only states the bill may be delivered electronically, implying it could also be physically delivered. This bill seeks to explicitly state that by adding that it can also be a delivered hard copy by person or mail. This bill further specifies that the patient retains the choice on method between the three options.
Comments