The Attorney General of Texas 

May 1, 1980 

Honorable James B. Bond, Chancellor Opinion No. Mw-176 

Texas A&M University System 

College Station, Texas 77943 Re: Validity of an appropriations 

rider decreasing the general 

revenue appropriation to the Texas 

Agricultural Extension Service to 

offset increases in federal funds. 

Dear Mr. Bond: 

You have requested our opinion regarding the validity of an 

appropriations rider decreasing the general revenue appropriation to the 

Texas Agricultural Extension Service to offset increases ln federal funds. 

The rider provides: 

In the event that the Texas Agricultural Extension 

Service receives Federal funds in excess of that 

estimated above, the General Revenue appropriation 

shall be reduced by an amount equal to the excess. 

1979 General Appropriations Act, at IV-56. You srggest that the rider is 

void (1) as an attempt to amend general law; and (21 as conflicting with 

federal law. 

The Texas Agricultural Extension Service was created by House 

Concurrent Resolution No. 2, Acts 1915, 34th Leg., at 273, which authorized 

Texas A&M College 

. . . to receive the grants of money appropriated 

under said [federal] Act, and to authorize and 

conduct agricultural extension work which shall be 

carried on in connection with the A.&M. College of 

Texas in accordance with the terms and conditions 

expressed in the Act of Congress aforesaid 

A rider is valid so long as it merely limits or restricts the expenditure of 

appropriated funds. Attorney General Opinions H-351 (1974); M-1199 (1972); 

V-1254, V-1253 (1951). In our opinion, the rider at issue here &es not in any 

p. 559 
Honorable James B. Bond - Page Two (NWw-176) 

way attempt to amend House Concurrent Resolution No. 2. Its effect is merely to limit or 

restrict the expenditure of appropriated funds. 

Although Congress could easily have conditioned a state’s receipt of funds under the 

Smith-Lever Act, 7 U.S.C. S 341, et seq., rpon that state’s maintainlng its funding at 

previous levels, Congress has not done so. The only expression of Congressional intent in 

this regard has appeared in the conferees’ reports for various Smith-Lever Act 

appropriations. See, e.g., Cong. Rec. H-9673 (October 24, 1979). A mere expression of 

the conferees’ intent 1s not sufficient to thwart the clear intent of the Texas Legislature 

in adopting the rider under discussion. We hold therefore that an appropriations rider 

which decreases the general revenue appropriation to the Texas Agricultural Extension 

Service to offset increases in federal funds is not invalid 

SUMMARY 

An appropriations rider which decreases the general revenue 

appropriation to the Texas Agricultural Extension Service to offset 

increases in federal funds is not invalid as an attempt to amend 

general law or as ConfRcting with federal law. 

Attorney General of Texas 

JOHN W. FAINTER, JR. 

First Assistant Attorney General 

TED L. HARTLEY 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

Prepared by Rick Gilpin 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

C. Robert Heath, Chairman 

Susan Garrison 

Rick GiIpin 

Charles Maddox 

Bruce Youngblood 

p. 560