Roxanne Lathan
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?
I would support fully funding livestock surveillance, rapid testing, veterinary response teams, sterile-fly production and dispersal, and emergency assistance for producers affected by quarantine or livestock losses. Movement restrictions should be targeted to confirmed risk areas and lifted when scientific evidence supports doing so. My approach would rely on USDA and Texas Animal Health Commission data, veterinary expertise, fly-trapping and outbreak modeling. Strong agricultural biosecurity protects our livestock, rural economy, food supply, and Texas producers.
Keywords: *Strong agricultural biosecurity protects Texas livestock, our food supply, and rural economies. *Fully fund surveillance, rapid testing, and veterinary response teams. *Expand sterile-fly production and dispersal to fight screwworm. *Use targeted, science-based livestock movement restrictions—not unnecessary statewide mandates. *Provide emergency assistance to producers facing quarantine, treatment costs, or livestock losses.
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?
Texas should welcome investment and innovation, but growth must pay its own way and must not compromise grid reliability, scarce water supplies, or affordable utility service for the Texans who already live here.
I would reassess state tax incentives to ensure taxpayers receive a measurable return. Incentives should be tied more closely to permanent jobs, wages, infrastructure impacts, water efficiency, and benefits to the local community. Large data centers should pay their fair share of the transmission, generation, and other infrastructure costs required to serve them. I would protect residential and small-business customers from higher utility bills.
I would require meaningful water-impact reviews before approving major projects in water-stressed areas and encourage recycled, reclaimed, or other non-potable water for cooling whenever feasible. Communities should know how much water a project expects to use before incentives or infrastructure commitments are made.
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 invest in repairing aging water systems, reducing leaks, improving wastewater treatment, expanding flood-control infrastructure, and developing reliable long-term water supplies. I also support agricultural conservation programs that help farmers and ranchers adopt efficient irrigation and water-saving technology without undermining their livelihoods. Texas water policy should balance conservation with the economic importance of agriculture and protect both rural communities and our future water supply.
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 an “all-of-the-above” energy strategy that strengthens Texas grid reliability while keeping electricity affordable. We should expand generation and transmission, improve battery storage, weatherize critical infrastructure, and increase energy-efficiency programs. Large users such as data centers should pay their fair share of the infrastructure needed to serve them and reduce demand during grid emergencies. Texas families and small businesses should not bear the cost of massive new industrial loads.
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 support stable NIH funding and protect negotiated reimbursement for the facilities, laboratories, equipment, and administrative infrastructure necessary for research. At the state level, Texas should consider targeted bridge or matching funds when federal disruptions threaten critical research projects.
Texas should also advocate for predictable federal research funding and oppose arbitrary funding changes that could undermine universities, hospitals, and long-term research. Protecting research infrastructure means protecting medical innovation, scientific discovery, high-paying jobs, and Texas’s 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?
I believe we must listen respectfully to parents and communities, provide clear and accurate information about vaccine safety, and make trusted healthcare professionals accessible to answer questions. Public health policy should be guided by credible medical evidence while recognizing legitimate concerns and maintaining public trust.
I support strong disease surveillance, rapid outbreak response, public education, and convenient access to recommended vaccines, especially in rural and underserved communities. When highly contagious diseases such as measles threaten schools and vulnerable Texans, the state has a responsibility to respond quickly and transparently to protect public health.
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 play an important role in policymaking, especially when decisions affect public health, agriculture, energy, water, and the environment. I would seek evidence from multiple credible sources, examine the quality of the research, and consult experts with relevant experience rather than relying on a single study or political viewpoint.
When evidence is uncertain, or experts disagree, I would consider the strength of the evidence, potential risks, costs, and consequences of acting or failing to act. Public opinion matters and policymakers should listen to the people they represent, but scientific findings should not be changed simply because they are unpopular. Good policy requires both evidence and public accountability.