Email from AMS Consulting

SENATE FLOOR - SB 12

Yesterday, the Texas Senate debated and passed SB 12 to third reading—a bill that would prohibit cities, counties, school districts, and other local governments from using public funds to hire lobbyists or pay dues to associations that advocate on their behalf.

Unfortunately, much of the debate veered away from the policy itself and turned into a broader attack on the lobbying profession. At one point, Senator Middleton claimed lobbyists are “filling the Capitol,” while also saying lawmakers “don’t hear from these hired gun lobbyists all year”—a contradiction that underscores just how off-track the conversation became.

As SB 12 heads to the House, we will continue to advocate against this legislation. As we have stated, PAAT's position is that political subdivisions, much like non-governmental entities and individuals, require the assistance of accountants, lawyers, engineers, architects, insurance consultants, or other professionals. They should have the ability to hire professional experts even though the tasks they undertake may require registration under Chapter 305 of the Government Code (the “Lobby Law”). Full disclosure, registration and reporting in compliance with the Lobby Law is more effective for the protection of the public than restrictions against hiring lobbyists.

Here is a brief overview of the arguments raised against SB 12 on the Senate floor:

Attacks on the Lobby Profession: As noted above, opponents of the bill noted that debate around the bill included repeated attacks on lobbyists, characterizing the lobby as “hired guns,” “fat cats,” and part of a “deep state.” Senators pushed back on this rhetoric, emphasizing that professional advocates are a critical part of the policy process and often help legislators improve bills, flag unintended consequences, and provide technical expertise.

Limits Local Voices: Critics of the bill argued that the bill would silence cities, counties, school districts, and other local entities—particularly rural and underserved communities that rely on professional associations like the Texas Municipal League and Texas Association of Counties to advocate on their behalf.

Chilling Effect on Associations: Concerns were raised that SB 12 could discourage participation in statewide associations that provide training, resources, and collective advocacy efforts vital to small and rural communities.

Unequal Standards Raise Equity Questions: Some Senators pointed out that SB 12 creates an uneven playing field by targeting only cities, counties, and school boards—while exempting powerful private interests like charter schools and business associations. The selective enforcement raises serious questions about fairness and equity in the policymaking process.

Undermines Transparency and Effectiveness: Several Senators warned that the bill could reduce transparency by forcing local governments to work around the system instead of engaging openly through associations. They also noted that the bill may void existing contracts, create legal confusion, and disrupt access to services like bill tracking and legal advice.

Political Overreach: Many saw SB 12 as ideologically driven and aimed more at silencing dissent than improving governance. Some warned that demonizing lobbyists and restricting local advocacy undermines democratic engagement and informed policymaking. Some lawmakers even warned that the legislation could prompt lawsuits on the grounds of free speech and equal protection under the law.

THANKS TO OUR INSTITUTE SPONSORS

Professional Advocacy Association of Texas

Join or Sponsor PAAT Here