Estimated Time to Read: 5 minutes
The Texas Senate has taken another decisive step in the ongoing debate over guaranteed income programs. On Thursday, the upper chamber approved Senate Bill 2010, legislation that would prohibit local governments from adopting or administering any form of guaranteed income initiative unless explicitly authorized by federal law. The bill passed by a vote of 22 to 9, with State Sen. César Blanco (D-El Paso) notably crossing party lines to vote with Republicans in favor of the measure.
This vote escalates an already active legal and legislative battle in Texas. At the center of the controversy is Harris County’s “Uplift Harris” program, a pilot guaranteed income initiative offering $500 monthly payments to low-income families. That program has been twice blocked by legal challenges from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, and its future now hangs in the balance as the Legislature seeks to explicitly outlaw such efforts.
What SB 2010 Would Do
SB 2010, authored by State Sen. Paul Bettencourt (R-Houston), would prohibit any “political subdivision”—cities, counties, etc.—from adopting or enforcing ordinances or regulations that establish guaranteed income programs. The legislation defines such programs as those offering direct or indirect monetary transfers (e.g., cash, gift cards, or equivalent payments) to individuals without restrictions on use.
Key provisions include:
- No Local Authority: Unless allowed by federal law, local governments may not establish or enforce any guaranteed income initiative.
- Ban on State or Local Funds: Even if federally authorized, no state or local public funds may be used to operate or support such programs.
- Limited Exception: The law allows temporary programs tied to employment, job training, or work requirements.
- Sunset Clause for Existing Programs: Any current guaranteed income programs may continue only until January 1, 2026, or until they expire—whichever comes first.
As Texas Policy Research has previously highlighted, this prohibition is directly tied to Article III, Section 52 of the Texas Constitution, which forbids grants of public money to private individuals without a clear public purpose. SB 2010 is the Legislature’s attempt to formally align local policy with that long-standing provision.
The Uplift Harris Program: From Launch to Litigation
The most prominent target of SB 2010 is Harris County’s Uplift Harris program, launched using $20.5 million in federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds. Originally designed to provide monthly stipends to nearly 2,000 low-income families in high-poverty zip codes, the program quickly drew fire from the Texas Attorney General’s Office.
In August 2024, Paxton filed his second lawsuit against the initiative, following a Texas Supreme Court ruling that the original version violated the state constitution. In response, county officials revised the program’s structure, hoping to insulate it from legal challenges—but Paxton was unmoved, and the state appeals court soon issued an injunction to block all payments while the litigation proceeds.
As we have previously covered in detail, the Harris County Commissioners Court doubled down on defending the program in court and in public messaging, arguing that it is a data-driven anti-poverty tool rather than a handout. But with both the courts and the Legislature now aligned against such initiatives, their legal footing is growing increasingly tenuous.
Senate Debate: Fiscal Stewardship vs. Local Autonomy
During floor debate on SB 2010, supporters framed the bill as a defense of taxpayer accountability and constitutional integrity. State Sen. Paul Bettencourt (R-Houston) criticized guaranteed income programs for creating inequities in how taxpayer funds are distributed:
“On behalf of the 82,000 residents that applied… and the only 1,900-plus that were actually going to get it… and all the taxpayers of Harris County that were going to pay $20 million for that program, I move final passage.”
Surprisingly, State Sen. César Blanco (D-El Paso) echoed many of these concerns in his explanation for voting in favor:
“Guaranteed income programs lack the structure and accountability needed to address the root causes of poverty… Directing limited resources into proven programs is the best way to build equity and stability.”
This breaks from the broader Democratic consensus and lends bipartisan weight to the fiscal arguments behind the bill.
But critics, including State Sen. Molly Cook (D-Houston), countered that such programs show promise. She cited research from one of the largest guaranteed income studies in the U.S., involving 5,000 participants across Texas and Illinois, which found no negative impact on workforce participation. In fact, many participants improved their employment situation or returned to school during the program period.
Next Stop: The Texas House
With the Senate having passed SB 2010, the bill now heads to the Texas House of Representatives, where Republicans hold a majority and leadership has aligned itself with Attorney General Paxton on similar policy matters.
For programs like Uplift Harris, this may represent the final nail in the coffin—unless they are dramatically restructured or fully funded and managed by private philanthropic sources.
Final Thoughts: A Shift in the Policy Winds
Since we began covering the rise of guaranteed income programs in Texas last year, what was once a fringe pilot idea has quickly turned into a statewide policy flashpoint. What SB 2010 represents is more than just a ban on one policy—it’s a signal from state lawmakers that redistributive experiments funded with public dollars, even if well-intentioned, are increasingly unwelcome in Texas.
Whether one sees these efforts as unconstitutional overreach or as necessary innovation, the outcome of this legislation will significantly shape how local governments think about anti-poverty policy going forward.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
