SB 239

84(R) - 2015
Senate Higher Education
Senate Higher Education
Higher Education

Vote Recommendation

  • Negative
  • Neutral
  • Neutral
  • Negative
  • Neutral


Charles Schwertner


Royce West

Bill Caption

Relating to student loan repayment assistance for certain mental health professionals.

Fiscal Notes

State Impact

Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for SB239, Committee Report 1st House, Substituted: a negative impact of ($2,975,000) through the biennium ending August 31, 2017.

No fiscal impact to local government.

Bill Analysis

SB 239 would create loan repayment assistance for certain mental health professionals. To be eligible, mental health professionals would be required to provide services in a designated mental health professional shortage area and provide care to Medicaid and CHIP clients or people committed to correctional facilities. The mental health professional would be limited to five years of repayment assistance. The bill also sets forth limitations on the percentage of repayment they would receive during the five year period and caps the total repayment assistance for different mental health professions.

Vote Recommendation Notes

05/20/2015 update:

SB 239 was amended with minor changes that do not affect our vote recommendation. We oppose SB 239 in the second chamber. The second chamber sponsor is Representative Zerwas and Representative Coleman.

First chamber recommendation:

While student loans from education can be crippling, the solution is not to fund additional loan repayment with taxpayer money.  SB 239 abridges the principles of the free market and limited government. First, the bill negatively impacts a free market because if there is a need for professionals in a certain area, then the market forces and the ability to profit will be a natural incentive for professionals to practice there. There is no need for artificial incentives from government. The principle of limited government is negatively impacted because the bill increases spending in additional to expanding government intervention in education.  For these reasons, we oppose SB 239.