Bill
    HB 100
    
    
        84(R) - 2015    
    
    
        House Higher Education     
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
        House Higher Education     
    
    
    
            Higher Education
    
    
    
    
     
    
        Vote Recommendation
        
            
                No            
            
                - 
                    Neutral                
- 
                    Neutral                
- 
                    Neutral                
- 
                    Negative                
- 
                    Neutral                
 
     
    
            Author(s)
                    John Zerwas
        
    
    
            Co-Author(s)
                    Travis Clardy
                    Sylvester  Turner
        
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
        
Bill Caption
        Relating to authorizing the issuance of revenue bonds to fund capital projects at public institutions of higher education.    
    
    
        Fiscal Notes
        Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds
 for HB100, Committee Report 1st House, Substituted: a negative impact 
of ($540,304,444) through the biennium ending August 31, 2017.
No significant fiscal implication to local government. 
     
    
    
        Bill Analysis
        05/18/2015 We still oppose HB 100 in the second chamber. The Senate sponsor is Senator Seliger. 
HB 100 would allow the board of regents to issue capital bonds for projects at universities, such as Texas A&M University, University of Texas at Austin, and the University of Houston.  The bill amends Education Code to provide additional bond authority for specified projects at the respective institutions. 
     
    
        
        
Vote Recommendation Notes
        This bill would abridge the principle of limited government, therefore 
we oppose this legislation. Our principle of limited government can be 
affected by an increase or decrease in spending.  This is a significant 
increase in spending for higher education and there is no compelling 
reason for the increase.  Increasing entitlements to schools does not 
guarantee better performance or quality of education.  With increasing 
student debt and the diminishing value of a college degree, there should
 be a legitimate purpose for spending more money on higher education 
institutions. This bill does not show that there is one.