Harris County constables will make $305,000 next year, a 129% increase since 2024 45%

By Sarah Grunau33%

8/7/2026, 12:43:21 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Availability Heuristic, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 29.2% saturation with 162 hits. Analysis detected 886 faulty-reasoning hits from 554 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 39.6% and a BS Rank of 45% (16,898 of 30,209 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 55.90% of the article peer group.

Each of the eight Harris County constables will be paid $305,000 next year  bringing their salaries to higher than that of the U.S. vice president. 
Harris County commissioners approved the pay boost for constables and several other elected officials in the county's fiscal year 2027 budget Thursday. 
County Judge Lina Hidalgo voted against the effort. 
It comes a year after some commissioners  previously titled the ‘GOP 3’ by Hidalgo  championed a law enforcement pay parity initiative that raised constable salaries by 62% from the previous year and exacerbated a multi-million dollar budget deficit. 
RELATED: Harris County commissioners signal support for boosted constable pay despite budget crunch 
“The proposal on the table is for each of them to be making $305,000,” Hidalgo said before the vote Thursday. 
“It's more than the vice president of the United States makes. 
It's more than a lot of big positions  it's more than astronauts make." 
Commissioner Rodney Ellis initially abstained from voting on the raises Thursday, but later approved the item. 
The proposed 2027 county budget, which could top $3 billion for the first time in the county's history, also includes pay raises for the district clerk, county attorney and district attorney. 
The county is also facing a $130 million budget deficit next year, stemming from ballooning inflationary costs. 
The pay raises for the eight elected constables are a 17% increase from their salaries last year. 
They have received steady raises since 2024, when their pay was just over $133,000 at the time. 
Proponents have over the years argued that raises for county law enforcement are necessary to attract and retain skilled officers. 
Last year, the county allotted about $130 million to finance substantial raises for officers, and trimmed other department budgets to reduce costs. 
About half of the budget reductions came from shifting jail medical expenditures to Harris Health. 
Forty-six percent of the county's 2026 general fund expenditures went towards law enforcement  about $1.2 billion of last year's total budget, according to a recent study from Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy. 
"The tax rate that we will be considering in just a few short weeks is probably the greatest tax-rate increase in the history of Harris County," Ramsey said. 
On Thursday, Hidalgo proposed a separate motion directing the county's human resources department to review all appointed department head salaries to be in line with recommendations. 
That item was approved unanimously. 
Ellis said commissioners need to be cautious in salary discussions because there’s a structural deficit. 
“We ought to be cognizant of what we are spending before we spend it,” Ellis said. 
Commissioners also denied Hidalgo's second attempt at a proposed tax-rate hike to fund early childcare programs. 
RELATED: Lina Hidalgo's proposed tax-rate hike for Harris County education programs fails for the second year in a row 
The rejection came almost one year after county commissioners voted against Hidalgo's first penny-tax proposal and said the county judge's efforts to pass the measure to support a slate of education programs disrupted decorum when she brought a group of children to the meeting. 
The upcoming year's tax rate could exceed 62 cents, and may go up to 68 cents if the county hospital district accepts the voter-approved tax rate, Ramsey said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 1.2%Houston Public Media: 1.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 7.4%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.9%Anchoring Bias7.4%This article: 17.0%Sarah Grunau: 2.3%Houston Public Media: 2.3%Availability Heuristic17.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 7.2%Sarah Grunau: 0.5%Houston Public Media: 0.3%Hindsight Bias7.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.5%Houston Public Media: 0.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 12.8%Sarah Grunau: 4.2%Houston Public Media: 3.6%Framing Effect12.8%This article: 2.7%Sarah Grunau: 0.5%Houston Public Media: 0.6%Loss Aversion2.7%This article: 3.1%Sarah Grunau: 0.3%Houston Public Media: 0.4%Status Quo Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.6%Sarah Grunau: 0.7%Houston Public Media: 2.0%Optimism Bias3.6%This article: 5.1%Sarah Grunau: 1.5%Houston Public Media: 0.9%Pessimism Bias5.1%This article: 29.2%Sarah Grunau: 9.3%Houston Public Media: 3.9%Negativity Bias29.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.3%Houston Public Media: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Sarah Grunau: 0.5%Houston Public Media: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error2.9%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 1.5%Houston Public Media: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.7%Sarah Grunau: 0.6%Houston Public Media: 1.2%Halo Effect4.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.6%Houston Public Media: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 7.9%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Primacy Effect7.9%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 6.7%Sarah Grunau: 1.4%Houston Public Media: 2.5%Appeal to Authority6.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 1.2%Houston Public Media: 0.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.6%Sarah Grunau: 1.1%Houston Public Media: 1.7%Hasty Generalization3.6%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 1.0%Houston Public Media: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.1%Sarah Grunau: 2.0%Houston Public Media: 3.6%Appeal to Emotion5.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 18.2%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 1.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)18.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.9%Sarah Grunau: 0.2%Houston Public Media: 0.3%Burden of Proof2.9%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 6.3%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Composition/Division6.3%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 1.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.9%Sarah Grunau: 1.3%Houston Public Media: 1.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.9%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.6%Sarah Grunau: 0.4%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Unattributed Quote3.6%This article: 2.5%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection2.5%This article: 2.5%Sarah Grunau: 0.8%Houston Public Media: 1.0%Biased Writer Voice2.5%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 1.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 2.3%Houston Public Media: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Grunau: 0.5%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

554 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers30%attributed speech386writer words
Selected voice

Ramsey

100%flagged-word coverage
56 attributed words33% of attributed speech71% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Quote-first Misdirection-3.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%Ramsey: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-3.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%Ramsey: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.