Texas House advances bill that would prohibit land sales to people and entities from certain countries
Members granted the governor such power when they amended Senate Bill 17, whose real estate sales restrictions were limited to countries that the U.S. national director of intelligence has designated as national security threats. Currently, that list includes only China, Iran, North Korea and Russia.
After giving the governor the ability to expand the list of restricted countries, the House then gave SB 17 preliminary approval in a 85-60 vote. The bill now heads back to the Senate.
State Rep. Nate Schatzline, the Republican from Fort Worth who introduced the amendment, said the goal was to make sure that any threats to Texas could quickly be addressed.
"Our governor can act swiftly rather than waiting for a year for that to be added into the [director of national intelligence's] designated country list," he said.
That amendment drew rebuke from Democrats.
'This gives the governor unfettered power to add whatever county he wants to in this bill," said state Rep. Gene Wu, chair of House Democratic Caucus. "It's kind of dangerous to say one person can decide whatever country he or she wants to add to this without any oversight, without any controls — this is the definition of overreach.'
Schatzline's amendment also allows the governor to bar people "transnational criminal organizations" to the list of entities barred from buying Texas property. Schatzline pointed to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua as an example.
State Rep. Cole Hefner, the Mt. Pleasant Republican carrying SB 17 in the lower chamber, described the bill during Thursday's hourslong debate as 'securing Texas land and natural resources and making sure that this precious resource does not fall prey to adversarial nations and oppressive regimes that wish to do us harm.'
The bill's advancement came over opposition from Democrats who are concerned that it could be used to potentially discriminate against Asian Americans.
The bill will need one more House vote before it goes back to the Senate. The upper chamber previously approved a version of the bill, but House members amended several key portions of it Thursday.
The Senate's previous version would have exempted anyone or any entity that leased the property to someone else for under 100 years. The House limited that exemption to property leased to someone else for one year or less. Rep. Mitch Little called the 100-year lease exemption 'a loophole that you could drive a Mack truck through.'
The House also previously amended the bill to exempt lawful permanent residents.
But Democrats failed to make changes to the bill several times Thursday. Their failed amendments included provisions that would have exempted visa holders such as medical students and researchers, performers and athletes. They also raised concerns that the law could hurt the Texas economy.
SB 17 is Brenham Republican Sen. Lois Kolkhorst's second attempt at limiting who can buy property in Texas. Similar legislation she authored in 2023 died in the House. In committee hearings this year, she described the legislation as protecting Texas' assets from 'hostile nations.'
'This is a matter of national security,' she said in March. 'Texas must act now to protect our land, food sources, water, and natural resources.'
A batch of new, more conservative lawmakers were elected to the House last year, giving new life to legislation that struggled in previous sessions. Chief among those measures are the creation of school vouchers.
If passed, the bill goes into effect Sept. 1 and would only apply to purchases or acquisitions after that date.
It would require the attorney general's office to create a process to investigate possible violations and refer the matter to a district court. If the court finds a violation, it would be authorized to order the purchaser to divest from the property either by selling it or terminating the lease, according to the House Research Organization's most recent analysis of the bill. The court also would be required to refer the matter for potential criminal offenses.
The amount of Texas property owned by entities from outside the U.S. is not tracked in detail, aside from agricultural land. But Joshua Blackman, a constitutional law professor at South Texas College of Law, said it is likely a very small fraction. In the U.S. overall, Chinese investors own less than 1% of total foreign-held acreage, according to 2021 data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Investors from Russia, Iran and North Korea collectively own less than 3,000 acres.
But to Abraham George, chair of the Texas Republican Party, 1% is too much — which is why the bill was a party priority.
Rep. Angie Chen Button, who was only the second Asian American woman to serve in the Legislature and whose parents fled from China, also spoke in support of the bill Thursday night, saying the bill aims to 'protect our freedom, liberty and national security.' She introduced a similar bill last session.
Some Asian Texans are concerned the bill would create animosity and 'state-sanctioned racial profiling,' said Lily Trieu, executive director of the civic engagement group Asian Texans for Justice.
The bill doesn't prohibit purchases of land based on national origin, which would violate federal civil rights laws. Instead, it prohibits people based on their permanent residence.
Wu, who immigrated to the United States from China as a child, said the bill could impact not just Chinese people in Texas, but members of all Asian communities in the state.
'Nobody knows the difference between Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese and Korean, right? Nobody knows what your immigration status is,' he said in an interview. 'When they discriminate against you … when they look for people to assault, they don't really care what you are. They care that you have Asian face.'
Trieu said the group's No. 1 concern is that individuals shouldn't be conflated with governments.
'Just like how no one here would want to travel to another country and be held individually accountable for what Governor Abbott does or what President Donald Trump does,' she said.
'These individuals should not be held accountable for what the government of their national origin does, or what their ideology is, or what, you know, the government does as an entity.'
Trieu said the group was formed to engage Asian Texans in civic participation such as voting, but this bill galvanized people into getting involved in legislation.
Wu expects the bill is just the start of that. And even with its passage, he sees it as a loss for the Republican Party because it could push Asian American voters to shift to the Democratic Party in the 2026 midterm elections.
'I think the Republicans are heading into gale force winds in 2026 if they want to alienate and make enemies of an entire community who for a large part has stayed out of politics,' he said in an interview.
First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Taken apart at a political chop shop: Proposed map would split Lodi into three Congressional districts
Aug. 19—California voters will be going to the polls in November to approve new Congressional districts that favor Democrats, and maps released Friday reveal that Lodi could be split into three districts. Currently, the entirety of Lodi is part of the 9th Congressional District held by Tracy-based Democrat Josh Harder. If voters approve new district boundaries this fall, Harder's district would include the southeastern portion of the city west of Hutchins Street, south of Kettleman Lane and east of Cherokee Lane, with a chunk east of Stockton Street and south of Mission Street. The new 9th District would include the cities of Manteca, Tracy, Pittsburg, Antioch and Oakley, and a portion of north Stockton north of Mormon Slough and west of Wilson Way. A chunk of north and central Lodi bordered by Kettleman Lane in the south, Cherokee Lane in the east and Lower Sacramento Road in the west would be in a new 7th District, along with Galt, Elk Grove, Wilton, Sloughouse, Clements, Linden, Farmington and West Sacramento. The remainder of Lodi would be in a new District 8 with Isleton, Rio Vista, Dixon, Vacaville, Fairfeild, Vallejo, Richmond and Hercules. "Slicing up our city for political ends benefits none of our residents, particularly as we're a state where redistricting is decided by citizen panels, not elected officials," Lodi City Councilwoman Lisa Craig-Hensley said. "Understanding the unique values and needs of Lodi residents is the job of elected officials. Only in that way can we make fair decisions that benefit the whole community. Lodi needs to be kept whole to benefit the residents who deserve representation that reflects our shared needs and values." Lodi Mayor Cameron Bregman said the proposal was simply a power grab that ignores the will of California voters, who have determined district boundaries twice in the last 17 years. "Above all, having elected officials is about representation," he said. "This state, county, and now city must deal with the grim fact that this redistricting is not about representation, but partisanship. We can kiss any federal help goodbye if the redistricting is approved." The redistricting effort is part of Gov. Gavin Newsom's battle with President Donald Trump, who has pushed for redistricting Congressional districts in Texas to favor Republicans. The map released Friday by the Legislature adds five more Democratic-leaning seats, and make four even more left-leaning. District 1, the northeastern corner of the state represented by Republican Rep. Doug LaMalfa, would change from "safe" to "safe" Democratic, as would District 3, which runs along California's eastern border represented by GOP Rep. Kevin Kiley. District 41, a battleground seat held by GOP Rep. Ken Calvert, transforms from safe Republican to safe Democratic, while District 48, which spans Riverside and San Diego counties and is held by GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, changes from safe Republican to lean Democratic. Harder's District 9 would move from "lean" Democratic to safe Democratic, as would District 27, a northern Los Angeles County seat held by Democratic Rep. George Whitesides. District 47, an Orange County district represented by Democratic Rep. Dave Min, also moves from lean Democratic to safe Democratic, as does District 45 which Democratic Rep. Derek Tran won last year in the most expensive race in the country. District 13, narrowly won by Democrat Rep. Adam Gray, changes from lean Republican to safe Democratic. "There are many cases where I've been supportive of the Legislature sending a bill to the voters for approval," Assemblyman Heath Flora, R-Ripon said. "This is not one of those cases, and the only reason is that so much of this process has been in secret and against the will of the voters from the beginning." David Cushman, chair of the San Joaquin County Republican Party, said the organization would fight Newsom's attempt to undermine the fair representation of residents. "Our citizens wanted to make sure we had representation that reflected our needs and values, not those of cities that have nothing in common with our county," he said. "The maps released yesterday are a direct affront to the hard work and countless hours spent just four years ago ensuring our county remained unified in one district. Gavin Newsom and the Sacramento politicians are attempting to split up our county and our communities for partisan political gain, not for the benefit of our residents." State Sen. Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton, said in a social media post last week that the redistricting effort is "fighting fire with fire" as Trump and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott attempt to add five Republican seats to the House of Representatives. He suggested other states that lean Democrat should do the same. "I've been through Congressional redistricting twice," he said. "It's a difficult experience for House members who spend most of the preceding decade developing relationships and understanding the challenges in their districts only to lose many of the people and regions they have worked for. "I would not advocate for mid-decade redistricting or for overturning California's independent redistricting commission except in extreme circumstances," he added. "The current situation is an emergency." McNerney said Trump thrives on division and retribution and his attempt to tilt the scales toward himself and the GOP in 2026 would democracy and election integrity. "If California and other blue states fail to respond to mid-decade gerrymandering by Texas and other red states, we'll face three-and-a-half more years of an unchecked Trump, further wrecking our economy and our democratic institutions thanks to a compliant House, Senate, and Supreme Court," he said. "If it flips to a Democratic majority in the 2026 election, as expected, the House will be able to put brakes on Trump's dash to autocracy." Manuel Zapata, chair of the San Joaquin County Democratic Party, told ABC10 over the weekend that while the redistricting would be "unfortunate" for Lodi, he defended Newsom's reasoning. "What happens in Texas will directly affect California because of the way that the House of Representatives works," he said. "So, it is a very local issue when we have one party completely rigging the system on a national level that is going to affect every single state." Solve the daily Crossword


USA Today
23 minutes ago
- USA Today
Get rid of mail-in voting? Trump goal sparks debate, threatened lawsuits
Trump has long railed against mail-in voting but experts say states and the Congress control election rules rather than the president. WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump's latest push to end absentee voting has ignited a firestorm of criticism and intense debate about the nation's election rules as the next midterm and presidential campaigns kick into gear. Election-law experts said a president has no role in governing elections. Advocacy groups threatened lawsuits aiming to block Trump. And Democrats braced for a political fight heading into the 2026 and 2028 election cycles as they look to rebound after a disastrous 2024 campaign. 'The Constitution gives states and Congress the power to run elections," said Michael Waldman, CEO of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. "Presidents have no lawful role.' But White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Aug. 19 that Trump would work with lawmakers to end mail-in voting because "this is a priority for the president." Here's what you need to know: How popular is mail-in voting? Mail-in voting is widespread and popular. Out of 155 million votes cast in 2024, nearly 47 million were mailed in, according to the Election Assistance Commission. Most states allow absentee voting for no reason, but some states require an excuse to avoid showing up in person. Eight states and Washington, DC, allow elections to be conducted entirely by mail, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Washington state mail ballots to all registered voters. Oregon Secretary of State Tobias Read said vote-by-mail elections are secure, accurate and honest. 'If he actually understood or cared about the American people, he'd know mail-in-voting is the best way to protect everyone's right to vote, especially rural folks, elderly people and hourly workers,' Read said. 'Mail-in-voting meets citizens exactly where they are: in their living rooms and around their kitchen tables.' Trump seeks to end mail-in voting Trump said Aug. 18 he would sign an executive order to abolish mail-in voting, which he slammed as vulnerable to fraud. Trump has long complained about absentee voting, since before the COVID-19 pandemic that shut down many in-person events. 'We're going to end mail-in voting," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. "It's a fraud." Trump's announcement came while special House races are pending in Arizona and Tennessee; New Jersey and Virginia will be choosing governors in November this year; and some big-city mayors will be chosen in New York and elsewhere. The whole country will be voting on House races and one-third of the Senate 2026, and for president in 2028. Despite Trump's claims, election experts said voting is the most secure in history. "As we have said repeatedly, our election infrastructure has never been more secure and the election community never better prepared to deliver safe, secure, free and fair elections for the American people," Jen Easterly, director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, said after the 2024 election. David Becker, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research, which works with election officials of both parties to ensure secure elections, said ballots are the most verifiable and recountable in history with only Louisiana not voting on paper. Audits confirm the results, he said. And Congress approved ID requirements to register to vote in the 2002 Help America Vote Act, which followed the razor-thin victory of President George W. Bush over Al Gore in 2000. Trump, Democrats expect political fight over mail-in ballots Trump argued the 2020 presidential result was rigged after what his aides called a "red mirage" of an Election Day lead disappeared as mail-in ballots were counted and Joe Biden won the White House. "I, AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, WILL FIGHT LIKE HELL TO BRING HONESTY AND INTEGRITY BACK TO OUR ELECTIONS," Trump said in a social media post Aug. 18 advocating an end to mail-in voting. During the 2024 campaign, Republicans supported mail-in voting to avoid handing Democrats an advantage even as Trump occasionally criticized them. But the GOP sought an Election Day deadline for mailed ballots to be counted. Leavitt said the White House will work with lawmakers at federal and state levels to change the law. 'When the Congress comes back to Washington, I'm sure there will be many discussions with our friends on Capitol Hill and also our friends in state Legislatures across the country to ensure we're protecting the integrity of the vote for the American people," Leavitt said. But Democrats vowed to fight Trump efforts to undermine mail-in voting. While Republicans in the House could potentially approve a bill, it would face a steep challenge in the Senate, where 60 votes are needed to overcome a filibuster and where the GOP holds a 53-47 majority. 'Senate Democrats will make sure that any and every measure that would make it even more difficult for Americans to vote will be dead on arrival in the Senate and will continue to fight to protect our democracy," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York. Experts: States control election rules, not presidents The Constitution unambiguously says states regulate elections and only Congress can change that, Becker said. 'Getting rid of mail voting, which has been around since at least the U.S. Civil War, and which is offered by the vast majority of states, red and blue, is an incredibly bad idea that would make our elections much less secure and vulnerable to interference,' said Becker, a former election lawyer at the Justice Department. 'He has zero power to change election policy with the swipe of the pen, as the founders expressly stated.' Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute, said Trump "has no constitutional authority to end mail voting by executive order." "The Framers of the U.S. Constitution took care to keep the main responsibility for administering elections with the states and localities, which are in no way mere 'agents' of federal authorities," Olson said. Advocacy groups expect lawsuits if Trump moves against mail-in voting Federal courts have repeatedly recognized the state role in elections, including when a judge largley blocked Trump's March executive order dealing with elections. In Massachusetts, U.S. District Judge Denise Casper, an appointee of President Barack Obama, blocked parts of Trump's order that sought to require voters to prove they are citizens and to prevent states from counting mail-in ballots after Election Day. Trump is appealing. "The Constitution does not grant the president any specific powers over elections," Casper wrote. Advocacy groups said getting rid of mail-in voting could discourage millions of people who appreciate the flexiblity of avoiding voting in person on Election Day. "Many veterans, grappling with service-related disabilities like mobility impairments or PTSD, rely on this accessible method to vote independently and privately from home, avoiding the physical and emotional toll of in-person polling," said Naveed Shah, political director for Common Defense, a group representing military veterans and their families. Advocates from several groups expected lawsuits to challenge any Trump order seeking to abolish mail-in voting. 'We are prepared to protect mail-in voting in court against unfounded and unconstitutional attacks, as we have in Pennsylvania, Mississippi and other states,' said Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Voting Rights Project. 'Access to mail-in voting is necessary to a fair and inclusive electoral process.'


Axios
23 minutes ago
- Axios
Colorado lawmakers tap reserve, end tax breaks to fill budget gap
Democratic leaders at the state Capitol outlined plans Tuesday to increase taxes, cut services and tap reserve funds to close a $1 billion budget hole spurred by President Trump's "big, beautiful bill." State of play: The legislation will generate fierce debate about how the state should manage its money when lawmakers return Thursday for a special legislative session. The core of the Democratic plan eliminates a handful of corporate tax breaks worth a combined $300 million to $400 million. The five-bill package will limit the business tax deduction, remove corporate tax breaks on foreign-sold goods and crack down on corporate profit shifting to tax haven countries. The intrigue: The most controversial proposal is lowering the state's 15% financial reserve by $200 million to $300 million, dropping it to 13% at a time when fiscal analysts are warning about a potential recession. Yes, but: Those moves are not enough to close a roughly $750 million gap. Instead, lawmakers will punt $300 million in spending cuts to balance the $44 billion state budget to the governor in consultation with the legislative Joint Budget Committee in the coming weeks. The governor is expected to move quickly to implement cuts by Sept. 1. What they're saying: "We're looking forward to rolling up our sleeves and making sure we can maintain strong fiscal stewardship here in Colorado," Gov. Jared Polis told Axios Denver in a recent interview. Between the lines: More than most states, Colorado is susceptible to changes in federal taxes because they affect state income taxes. The federal tax bill, known as H.R. 1, reduced the state's individual and corporate income taxes by an estimated $1.2 billion, according to the governor's office. The other side: Republican state lawmakers are touting the cuts from Trump's tax bill and pushing back against Democratic efforts to generate new tax revenue, suggesting spending cuts are what is most needed. Sen. Byron Pelton (R-Sterling) plans to introduce legislation requiring voter approval for any bill that changes state tax liability caused by federal tax law. What's next: Beyond the budget, Democratic lawmakers also plan to introduce legislation to stabilize the state's health care marketplaces amid projections that thousands of residents could lose their insurance and enable Planned Parenthood to accept Medicaid payments.