Leticia Gutierrez
DemocraticQ1 In June 2026, USDA confirmed New World screwworm in Texas livestock for the first time in decades; as of early July, dozens of infestations have been confirmed across South Texas (USDA APHIS , 2026). USDA estimates a full-scale outbreak comparable to past infestations could cost the regional economy billions of dollars (USDA APHIS). What policies, if any, would you support to respond to the current outbreak and improve Texas’s agricultural biosecurity (practices and safeguards that prevent pests and diseases from spreading through livestock populations), and what evidence or considerations would inform that approach?
Texas has not fully utilized every tool available to combat the screwworm outbreak, and Texan families may see that cost reflected in the grocery store in their beef prices. Currently, a facility to produce male sterile flies is being built in Texas. While this may be a future option to combat screwworm outbreaks, the facility is not predicted to be functional until late 2027. The US has been working with international partners to release some sterile males and one important measure that should be implemented in tandem is a Screwworm Adult Suppression System. This system is a classic attractant and insecticide which has demonstrated effectiveness in previous outbreaks. Expanding the use of proven suppression methods could help control the outbreak, protect the food supply, and reduce its impact on Texas families.
Evidence and considerations: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/10/texas-screwworm-cattle-beef-prices-inflation.html https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/flesh-eating-screw-worm-fight-plan-rcna348521 https://www.texastribune.org/2026/06/04/screwworm-texas-united-states/
Q2 Texas is on track to become the nation’s leading data center market within the next three years (Bloom Energy, 2026). The state’s grid operator has more than doubled its 2030 forecast for data center power demand over the past year (ERCOT, 2025). Such growth brings economic opportunity while placing significant demands on water, land, and energy systems, raising questions about tax incentives, utility costs, and local community impacts. What policies, if any, would you support around water/energy allocation, tax incentives, or utility costs for data center development in Texas, and what evidence informs that position?
While data centers can contribute to economic growth and technological advancement, their rapid expansion has repeatedly placed significant burdens on nearby communities by consuming large amounts of water and electricity. In Texas, where water resources are increasingly strained and the power grid faces growing demand, data centers should not receive unrestricted access to public resources at the expense of residents. Recently the Texas Water Development Board released their plan in which AI Data Centers were referenced but the board did not have enough information to determine water usage. In other words, the water usage of AI Data Centers is not represented in the report, and a new report will not be out for another 5 years.
With hundreds of AI Data Center applications I would support stronger limits on water and energy use, requiring data centers to help fund the infrastructure they depend on, and carefully evaluating tax incentives to ensure communities receive meaningful economic benefits in return. Economic development is important, but it should not come at the cost of higher utility costs, reduced water availability, or greater strain on essential public resources.
Evidence and considerations: https://www.eenews.net/articles/texas-water-plan-ignores-data-center-surge-2/ https://www.twdb.texas.gov/waterplanning/swp/2027/index.asp
Keywords: Economic development is important, but it should not come at the cost of higher utility costs, reduced water availability, or greater strain on essential public resources.
Q3 Texas faces flooding while simultaneously experiencing water scarcity driven by drought, groundwater depletion, and population growth (TWDB, 2024). Hundreds of Texas waterways are listed as impaired for bacteria, mercury, and other pollutants, threatening water quality for communities across the state (TCEQ, 2024). Agriculture is the largest consumer of the state’s groundwater, yet it is also well positioned to be a valuable partner in conservation efforts. What policies, if any, would you support to improve Texas’s water infrastructure, and what considerations would guide your approach to the state’s agricultural economy?
I would support policies that prioritize natural flood mitigation and regenerative farming practices, including wetland and floodplain restoration, and other methods that improve soil health and water retention. Healthy soils can absorb more rainfall, reduce runoff and erosion, replenish groundwater, and retain moisture during droughts, making farms and surrounding communities more resilient to extreme weather. These practices can also reduce the amount of nutrients and pollutants entering Texas waterways, helping protect clean water for people while preserving water and habitat within natural ecosystems for wildlife. Because agriculture is a major user of groundwater, farmers should be supported as partners through incentives and technical assistance that encourage these conservation practices, rather than policies that place unnecessary burdens on the agricultural economy.
This issue is especially important in District 9, which lies along the Houston Ship Channel, where industrial activity and major infrastructure projects can directly affect the quality of our water, air, and land. As an advocate, I have already been working alongside community members through the Healthy Port Communities Coalition to advocate for safe water, clean air, and healthy land during the Port of Houston’s Project 11 construction. Economic development should not come at the expense of public health.
Evidence and considerations: https://bayoucitywaterkeeper.org/nature-based-flooding-solutions/ https://soilhealthinstitute.org/news-events/how-does-soil-health-increase-resilience-to-drought-and-extreme-rainfall-2/ https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/environment/article/port-houston-army-corps-dredge-project-11-19826625.php https://www.citizen.org/article/letter-from-eight-texas-lawmakers-urging-port-houston-to-support-disposing-project-11-dredge-material-in-galveston-bay-instead-of-on-land/
Keywords: This issue is especially important in district 9, which lies along the Houston Ship Channel, where industrial activity and major infrastructure projects can directly affect the quality of our water, air, and land
Q4 The Texas power grid continues to face strain from extreme heat and increasing demand, including from data centers. What policies, if any, would you support to improve grid reliability for Texas consumers and businesses?
I support policies that put reliability and Texas consumers first. Our grid has failed Texans repeatedly under current leadership, including during Winter Storm Uri and other extreme weather events. Texans should not have to worry about losing power during extreme heat or cold.
Texas should weatherize and modernize existing infrastructure, while holding energy providers accountable for reliability failures as well as ensuring that government agencies have and use their ability to check progress and ensure quality. We also need to responsibly manage new demand from large energy users like data centers so their growth does not drive up costs or undermine reliability for everyone else.
Finally, Texas should reconsider its isolation from the national power grid. Connecting to the national grid would give Texas access to additional power during emergencies and provide another tool to keep the lights on.
Texans deserve a grid built for reliability—not one that fails when we need it most.
Evidence and considerations: https://baigroupllc.com/why-texas-suffered-power-disruptions-during-winter-storm-uri/ https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/energy-environment/2025/08/18/528877/texas-promised-to-winterize-its-energy-grid-an-audit-found-big-problems/ https://www.bakerinstitute.org/research/weigh-pros-and-cons-texas-grid-integration
Keywords: Texans deserve a grid built for reliability—not one that fails when we need it most.
Q5 Texas universities and hospitals receive approximately $1.9 billion annually in NIH funding across 118 research sites, supporting tens of thousands of jobs and driving medical and scientific innovation (FASEB, 2025). NIH grants reimburse institutions for both direct research costs and indirect costs, the facilities, administration, and support infrastructure that make research possible. A 15% indirect cost cap proposed by NIH in 2025, currently blocked by federal courts, would sharply reduce this reimbursement below the rates Texas institutions have negotiated, cutting an estimated $300 million in annual support that institutions would need to absorb or backfill (Kamerlin & Elias, 2025). What policies, if any, would you support at the state or federal level to protect the long-term stability of Texas’s research infrastructure, and why?
I would strongly support protecting federal investment in research and maintaining negotiated indirect-cost rates. Losing $1.9 billion in investment in our health research is a devastating blow to our job market as well as health research innovation.
At the federal level, I would oppose arbitrary caps and support restoring negotiated reimbursement rates while maintaining accountability and transparency in how funds are spent. At the state level, Texas should strengthen its research institutions through targeted investments and partnerships so we are not unnecessarily dependent on a single source of funding. Protecting research infrastructure is an investment in Texas jobs, innovation, public health, and our long-term economic competitiveness.
Evidence and considerations: https://www.texastribune.org/2025/02/10/texas-universities-research-nih/
Keywords: Protecting research infrastructure is an investment in Texas jobs, innovation, public health, and our long-term economic competitiveness.
Q6 Texas kindergartners’ measles vaccination rate fell to 93.24% in the 2024-2025 school year, a decline from prior years amid a national resurgence (Texas Department of State Health Services, 2025). That year, Texas recorded 762 confirmed measles cases, including the deaths of two unvaccinated school-age children, in the state’s largest outbreak since 1992 (Texas DSHS, 2025). Measles can cause serious complications: roughly 1 in 5 unvaccinated people who contract it are hospitalized, and it can lead to pneumonia, brain swelling, or death (CDC). As a policymaker, how do you approach engaging with communities that have concerns about infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety, and what policies, if any, would you support related to these issues, and why?
We cannot afford to let preventable diseases place an even greater burden on families, schools and already-strained health care systems.
I would engage communities with respect, transparency and clear, evidence-based information about vaccine safety and the risks of infectious diseases. I also support reinstating the previous schedule of vaccines required for children to attend public schools, while making vaccines accessible through schools, community clinics and other low-cost providers.
Texas’s recent measles outbreak shows what happens when vaccination rates decline. We should protect our children through prevention, education and access to care—not wait until preventable diseases return and tragedies harm our community.
Evidence and considerations: https://www.npr.org/2026/08/11/nx-s1-5928121/vaccine-schedule-trump-executive-order-parents-confusion
Keywords: We should protect our children through prevention, education and access to care—not wait until preventable diseases return and tragedies harm our community.
Q7 Scientific evidence is generated through the systematic testing and evaluation of ideas. It provides knowledge the helps us understand the world and predict the likely consequences of different choices, such policy making related to public health, energy, agriculture, and environmental regulation. What role, if any, should scientific evidence and expert input play in your policymaking process, and how would you evaluate competing or uncertain scientific claims when making policy decisions? What role, if any, should that process play when scientific consensus and public opinion diverge?
Scientific evidence and expert input should be at the center of policymaking. In my day-to-day work as a Government Outreach Director, I work closely with our research and policy team to ask questions, evaluate evidence and gather the data needed to support the policies we promote. That approach is important to me, and it will not change if I have the privilege of serving as your Congressperson.
When scientific claims conflict, I would look at the quality of the research, the strength of the evidence, and the expertise and credibility of the sources. I also believe policymakers should be honest about uncertainty rather than presenting incomplete evidence as fact.
Public input matters deeply, but I believe that elected officials have a responsibility to distinguish between what is popular and what the evidence shows. When public opinion and scientific consensus diverge, I would listen to constituents, communicate what the evidence tells us, and make decisions grounded in the best available science.