A controversial bill that would require political advertisers in Texas to disclose when they use artificial intelligence to alter images passed the Texas House on Wednesday, following heated debate over free speech, campaign integrity, and political retribution.
House Bill 366, spearheaded by former House Speaker Rep. Dade Phelan (R-Beaumont), cleared its final House hurdle with a 102–40 vote, earning support across party lines but seeing every “nay” come from Republicans. The legislation is one of the first of its kind to impose potential jail time — up to a year — for producing misleading political advertising using generative AI without proper disclosure.
The bill would apply to paid political advertisements intentionally altered for the purpose of influencing an election, mandating that such material carry a clear disclaimer that the imagery is not authentic. The Texas Ethics Commission (TEC) will oversee enforcement and define the disclosure’s format. The penalty for violating the law is a Class A misdemeanor, which can include a fine of up to $4,000 or up to one year in jail.
Technology platforms or distributors — such as social media companies or mail services — are explicitly exempt from liability under the bill.
Phelan’s Personal Push
Phelan’s support for the bill stems from direct experience. During his bruising 2024 primary runoff, opponents circulated political mailers with doctored images placing his head on other politicians’ bodies — including one hugging former Speaker Nancy Pelosi and another depicting him as part of the 2021 Texas Democratic walkout.
The bill's number, HB 366, is a not-so-subtle nod to Phelan’s narrow 366-vote primary victory, highlighting how personal the issue has become.
“This is about the integrity of our elections,” Phelan said on the House floor. “What voters see matters — whether it’s on television, in the mailbox, or online. And this isn’t the first bill we’ve taken up to address artificial intelligence.”
Clash Over Free Speech and Memes
But HB 366 sparked fierce resistance from some Republicans who viewed the bill as a threat to political speech — especially grassroots activism and satire.
State Rep. Shelley Luther (R-Tom Bean), known for being jailed in 2020 for defying COVID-19 shutdown orders, objected to the severity of the potential punishment. “I’ve been to jail. For three days. For working,” she said. “Do you think that’s a fair punishment for someone creating an image or a meme?”
Phelan pushed back, noting that financial penalties alone often go ignored in the heat of high-stakes elections. “A $500 fine in a $10 million campaign is just the cost of doing business,” he argued.
State Rep. Mitch Little (R-Lewisville) raised alarm that the bill could be used to criminalize regular citizens spending modest sums — over $100 — to promote AI-generated memes or satire, pointing to vague language in the bill’s second section. While the bill’s backers said it targets formal campaign expenditures, opponents argued that its thresholds could sweep in small-scale political actors.
“Speaker Phelan, it sounds like you found out that when you live by the sword, you die by the sword,” Little said pointedly.
“I didn’t die by the sword,” Phelan shot back.
Political Undertones and Broader Support
The debate unfolded against a backdrop of intra-party conflict. Many of the members opposing HB 366 had also fought against Phelan in his recent re-election and opposed his leadership during his speakership.
Supporters of the bill, however, argued the legislation wasn’t about settling political scores — but about safeguarding democracy from deceptive technology.
“Don’t make a mockery of our system,” said Rep. Christian Manuel (D-Beaumont), a neighboring legislator and Phelan ally. “This is not about protecting egos. It’s about protecting our constituents.”
Texas isn’t alone in tackling the challenge. The New Hampshire presidential primary saw a fake robocall using an AI-generated voice of President Joe Biden urging Democrats not to vote — an incident frequently cited by HB 366 supporters.
What’s Next?
The Texas Senate passed a similar bill in March with bipartisan support. That version, sponsored by Sens. Nathan Johnson (D-Dallas) and Lois Kolkhorst (R-Brenham), carries a lighter Class B misdemeanor penalty and includes a civil cause of action for those harmed by such ads.
If the chambers cannot reconcile differences, the legislation may go to a conference committee for final negotiation.
Meanwhile, Phelan has several other election-related bills queued for House debate, including proposals on out-of-state campaign donation caps and stricter disclosure for text and broadcast ads.
.jpg)
.jpg)
