"I understand that in some cases, agencies may have used significant amounts of money to hire actors and professional media companies to run advertisements promoting a state government program that is considered controversial, sometimes even objectionable, by the citizenry whose taxpayer dollars are used to fund these promotional pieces."

Paxton added that the committee is to consider whether legislation is needed to safeguard taxpayer dollars, though there was not much discussion at the hearing about what exactly that legislation would look like.

Not surprisingly, much of the hearing surrounded the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). The agency’s Coby Chase testified at length, telling the committee about the department’s Keep Texas Moving Campaign, as well as about its other advertising campaigns, such as "Don’t Mess with Texas." Critics have blasted the agency, accusing it of using public funds to promote toll roads.

Most of the discussion at the hearing, however, surrounded not the advertising campaign but rather the TxDOT environmental hearings where TxDOT officials could not answer questions from the public.

Representatives asked repeatedly which federal laws prohibit TxDOT officials from answering questions at hearings and how that rule aggravates the public.

Chase did tell the committee that the agency’s "Keep Texas Moving" campaign on toll roads totaled $4.5 million. He noted that some of the campaign was about informing the public about the new roads.

"I don’t think we have a problem explaining to the public what’s happening," said Rep. Ken Paxton (R-McKinney) to Chase. "The problem we run into is when it looks like you’re promoting something that isn’t necessarily here yet or pushing a cause that maybe the Legislature hasn’t done."

After Chase spoke, Terri Hall, representing Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom (TURF), presented a video of Commissioner Ted Houghton and executive director Amadeo Saenz stating that the agency supports toll roads.

Hall discussed the group’s lawsuit, seeking to stop the ad campaign as an illegal expenditure of public funds. The district court granted the state immunity, Hall said, but the case is on appeal.

Lawmakers also heard from several other state agencies about their advertising programs, but most of these are non-controversial ads about an existing state program and agencies such as the state health care agencies did not have to field many questions from lawmakers.

The Lottery Commission encountered tough questions from Rep. Dan Flynn (R-Van) about ads that publicize that money raised by the lottery goes to education. Flynn noted that many constituents have concerns about using gambling to fund schools and asked the commission’s executive director about that.

Another topic discussed at the hearing was government-financed lobbying. "The practice of you being lobbied with tax dollars and the public seeing advertising and advocacy on issues using their tax dollars is very objectionable," said Peggy Venable, state director of Americans for Prosperity – Texas. "As a matter of fact, I’m hoping that you will take action that will stop this."

Venable said a promotional video was shown to all students in her daughter’s school plugging a Round Rock bond initiative. She suggested a way to differentiate between educational materials and advocacy – are both sides of controversial issues told?

The Round Rock video did not mention the cost to taxpayers of the bonds or the opposition to the video.

"I think you need to look at this expenditure like you would any other expenditure of state dollars," said Talmadge Heflin, director of the Center for Fiscal Policy Studies at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. "And that is, does it meet the primary mission of the state, are the benefits unambiguous and universal, are they generally a benefit for all parts of the state, do the costs yield a real benefit? …

[I]s it an advertisement that only government can appropriately or effectively do, and is there any evidence of past success of such advertising – is it yielding a return, will the advertisement protect private property, is there evidence that it will protect the liberty of the people of the State of Texas, and does it have an opportunity to promote private enterprise …[I]s there any measurable way you can determine whether it’s effective or not."

Heflin added that he believes that not all government advertising would meet the test he outlined above.

Lawmakers have an interim charge on the topic of government-funded advertising campaigns and will submit a report to the Speaker by year’s end.

Comments (0)

Comment	smaller | bigger
Name
Write the displayed characters
Subscribe via email (Registered users only) I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.
	Add Comment