🔴Relating to the Texas Agricultural Finance Authority and certain programs administered by the authority.

HB 43

🔴 HB 43: Public Agriculture Funds Handed to Appointees, No Oversight

What it says it does:
HB 43 expands loan and grant programs through the Texas Agricultural Finance Authority. It raises award caps, removes age restrictions, and creates new programs for agricultural pest and disease control.

What it actually changes:
The bill gives a governor-appointed board control over large sums of public money with no competitive application process. It removes previous limits on fund disbursement and allows public money to be used to seek additional public grants, creating layered pipelines without oversight.

Who is pushing for it:
Support came from major ag trade groups including Texas Farm Bureau, Plains Cotton Growers, Texas Cotton Ginners Association, Texas Veterinary Medical Association, and Texas A&M AgriLife. Registered lobbyists representing these groups testified in support.

Who benefits:
Large commodity groups, land-owning nonprofits, and agency-affiliated research institutions. They now have direct, noncompetitive access to taxpayer-backed funds and can apply for and execute programs they design themselves.

Who gets left out or exposed:
Small farmers without lobby access or grant-writing infrastructure. Prairie View A&M lost its seat on the TAFA board. Taxpayers lose transparency, and the Legislative Budget Board no longer has advance review authority over disbursements.

Why this matters long term:
HB 43 sets a structural precedent for using public funds without legislative guardrails. Once in place, these programs are permanent, but funding is discretionary. It allows public-private partnerships to run without standard procurement rules or public scoring.

What to watch next:
Expect these models to appear in other sectors like water, energy, or education. Watch how TAFA rules are written, how grants are awarded, and whether AgriLife or similar agencies begin contracting themselves with no external review.

Bottom line:
HB 43 looks like rural investment, but it quietly removes oversight, hands spending control to appointees, and opens new channels for politically connected entities to access public money with no accountability.