Texas House backs Landgraf's push to protect property tax exemptions for homeowners
May 1—AUSTIN — State Rep. Brooks Landgraf (R-Odessa) proudly announced in a Thursday news release that House Bill 2730, which he joint-authored, passed the Texas House of Representatives this week with unanimous support. The bill now moves to the Senate and seeks to protect the homestead exemptions of homeowners across Texas.
Under current law, some appraisal districts have required homeowners to reapply for their homestead exemptions — even without credible evidence that they no longer qualify. H.B. 2730 addresses this by amending the Tax Code to prohibit chief appraisers from requiring a new application or confirmation of eligibility unless they have good reason to believe the homeowner no longer qualifies for the homestead exemption. In such cases, the appraiser must provide a written notice clearly stating the reasons for the request, along with the appropriate application form.
"This bill prevents homeowners from being burdened with unnecessary paperwork and ensures their exemption can't be questioned without valid cause," Landgraf said. "This is a win for all Texas homeowners," Landgraf added. "It provides homeowners with peace of mind, knowing their homestead exemption is secure."
H.B. 2730, which was filed by State Rep. Drew Darby (R-San Angelo) restores fairness and common sense to the property tax system. Rep. Landgraf remains committed to advancing this legislation in the Senate to protect the rights of Texas homeowners and reduce bureaucratic overreach.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
Medicaid enrollees fear losing health coverage if Congress enacts work requirements
It took Crystal Strickland years to qualify for Medicaid, which she needs for a heart condition. Strickland, who's unable to work due to her condition, chafed when she learned that the U.S. House had passed a bill that would impose a work requirement for many able-bodied people to get health insurance coverage through the low-cost, government-run plan for lower-income people. "What sense does that make?" she asked. "What about the people who can't work but can't afford a doctor?" The measure is part of the version of President Donald Trump's "Big Beautiful" bill that cleared the House last month and is now up for consideration in the Senate. Trump is seeking to have it passed by July 4. The bill, as it stands, would cut taxes and government spending — and also upend portions of the nation's social safety net. For proponents, the ideas behind the work requirement are simple: Crack down on fraud and stand on the principle that taxpayer-provided health coverage isn't for those who can work but aren't. The measure includes exceptions for those who are under 19 or over 64, those with disabilities, pregnant women, main caregivers for young children, people recently released from prisons or jails, or during certain emergencies. It would apply only to adults who receive Medicaid through expansions that 40 states chose to undertake as part of the 2010 health insurance overhaul. Many details of how the changes would work would be developed later, leaving several unknowns and causing anxiety among recipients who worry that their illnesses might not be enough to exempt them. Advocates and sick and disabled enrollees worry, based largely on their experience, that even those who might be exempted from work requirements under the law could still lose benefits because of increased or hard-to-meet paperwork mandates. Strickland, a 44-year-old former server, cook, and construction worker who lives in Fairmont, North Carolina, said she could not afford to go to a doctor for years because she wasn't able to work. She finally received a letter this month saying she would receive Medicaid coverage, she said. "It's already kind of tough to get on Medicaid," said Strickland, who has lived in a tent and times and subsisted on nonperishable food thrown out by stores. "If they make it harder to get on, they're not going to be helping." Steve Furman is concerned that his 43-year-old son, who has autism, could lose coverage. The bill the House adopted would require Medicaid enrollees to show that they work, volunteer or go to school at least 80 hours a month to continue to qualify. A disability exception would likely apply to Furman's son, who previously worked in an eyeglasses plant in Illinois for 15 years despite behavioral issues that may have gotten him fired elsewhere. Furman said government bureaucracies are already impossible for his son to navigate, even with help. It took him a year to help get his son onto Arizona's Medicaid system when they moved to Scottsdale in 2022, and it took time to set up food benefits. But he and his wife, who are retired, say they don't have the means to support his son fully. "Should I expect the government to take care of him?" he asked. "I don't know, but I do expect them to have humanity." About 71 million adults are enrolled in Medicaid now. And most of them — around 92% — are working, caregiving, attending school or disabled. Earlier estimates of the budget bill from the Congressional Budget Office found that about 5 million people stand to lose coverage. A KFF tracking poll conducted in May found that the enrollees come from across the political spectrum. About one-fourth are Republicans; roughly one-third are Democrats. The poll found that about 7 in 10 adults are worried that federal spending reductions on Medicaid will lead to more uninsured people and would strain health care providers in their area. About half said they were worried reductions would hurt their ability or their family to get and pay for health care. Amaya Diana, an analyst at KFF, points to work requirements launched in Arkansas and Georgia as keeping people off Medicaid without increasing employment. Amber Bellazaire, a policy analyst at the Michigan League for Public Policy, said the process to verify that Medicaid enrollees meet the work requirements could be a key reason people would be denied or lose eligibility. "Massive coverage losses just due to an administrative burden rather than ineligibility is a significant concern," she said. One KFF poll respondent, Virginia Bell, a retiree in Starkville, Mississippi, said she's seen sick family members struggle to get onto Medicaid, including one who died recently without coverage. She said she doesn't mind a work requirement for those who are able, but worries about how that would be sorted out. "It's kind of hard to determine who needs it and who doesn't need it," she said. Lexy Mealing, 54 of Westbury, New York, who was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 2021 and underwent a double mastectomy and reconstruction surgeries, said she fears she may lose the medical benefits she has come to rely on, though people with "serious or complex" medical conditions could be granted exceptions. She now works about 15 hours a week in "gig" jobs but isn't sure she can work more as she deals with the physical and mental toll of the cancer. Mealing, who used to work as a medical receptionist in a pediatric neurosurgeon's office before her diagnosis and now volunteers for the American Cancer Society, went on Medicaid after going on short-term disability. "I can't even imagine going through treatments right now and surgeries and the uncertainty of just not being able to work and not having health insurance," she said. Felix White, who has Type I diabetes, first qualified for Medicaid after losing his job as a computer programmer several years ago. The Oreland, Pennsylvania, man has been looking for a job, but finds that at 61, it's hard to land one. Medicaid, meanwhile, pays for a continuous glucose monitor and insulin and funded foot surgeries last year, including one that kept him in the hospital for 12 days. "There's no way I could have afforded that," he said. "I would have lost my foot and probably died." ___ Associated Press writer Susan Haigh in Hartford, Connecticut, contributed to this article.
Politico
3 hours ago
- Politico
Rand Paul says he'd be willing to negotiate on megabill support
One of the Senate GOP's biggest critics of President Donald Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' won't rule out coming around on the sweeping domestic policy package. But Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told NBC's Kristen Welker on Sunday that he would need the White House to make major modifications to the bill's planned $5 trillion debt ceiling hike to garner his support. 'Congress is awful with money, and so you should give them a more restricted credit line, not an expansive one,' he said on 'Meet the Press.' 'Yes, the debt ceiling has to go up, but what I've said is it ought to go up three months at a time and then we should have a renewed debate about the debt. We shouldn't put it up $5 trillion and wait two years, go through another election cycle and be almost toward the end of the Trump administration and say, 'Oh, whoops, we've added a bunch of debt.'' Trump's megabill passed the House by just a single vote in May, landing in a Senate Republican caucus with competing priorities and a tricky political landscape. But three of the Senate GOP's most skeptical deficit hawks — Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, Utah Sen. Mike Lee and Florida Sen. Rick Scott — have signaled they could eventually lend their support to the bill. Gaining Paul's approval could prove far more costly for appropriators. 'Separate out the debt ceiling and have a separate vote on it,' Paul told Welker. 'And I won't be the deciding vote on this. This is what I tell my supporters. If I am the deciding vote, they'll negotiate. If I'm not, they won't. So far they've been sending their attack dogs after me, and that's not a great persuasion technique.'
Politico
3 hours ago
- Politico
Trump should immediately push Russia sanctions, Sen. Blumenthal says
Sen. Richard Blumenthal on Sunday urged President Donald Trump to immediately push for legislation that would ratchet up sanctions against Russia. 'This moment cries out for presidential leadership. There is an urgency here,' the Connecticut Democrat said on CBS' 'Face the Nation.' Speaking in a joint interview with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Blumenthal urged Trump to move quickly: 'I think the president should call on the Senate to vote approval of the Russian sanctions bill literally tomorrow. He's on his way tonight to the G7 meeting. He will be sitting across from world leaders. Right now, very bluntly, the perception may be one of weakness in terms of America's position on Ukraine. He can be there in a position of strength.' A G7 meeting is getting under way in Kananaskis in Alberta, Canada. Graham on Thursday made his case for the sanctions in an op-ed for Fox News. 'We now have over 84 Senate cosponsors and 70 House cosponsors of legislation to enact hard-hitting sanctions and tariffs on Russia and its financial backers,' he wrote. 'It is clear to me and virtually every sponsor of the Russia sanctions bill that the way we deal with Putin will either encourage or deter bad actors.' On Sunday, Graham and Blumenthal also discussed the Israel-Iran war. Both are eager to see any possibility of Iran developing nuclear weapons eliminated. 'I would urge President Trump to go all in to make sure that when this operation is over, there's nothing left standing in Iran regarding their nuclear program. If that means providing bombs, provide bombs,' Graham told host Margaret Brennan. Blumenthal added: 'A nuclear-armed Iran is a unacceptable threat to the world, not just to Israel, but to the United States as well. And I support Israel's right to defend itself against this existential menace. I'm very concerned right now about United States personnel in the region, our servicemen and women, but also the civilians that are there.' The Connecticut Democrat also said the country 'ought to strengthen sanctions against Iran.' Graham seconded that idea. 'I'll be your wingman. We'll write the bill right here on television. China, if you're listening, stop buying Russian oil, and stop helping the Iranians. You make the world a safer place if you would stop,' he told Brennan.
