Sandy Ibanez
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?
Protecting Texas livestock from the New World screwworm is vital to maintaining our state’s agricultural economy and protecting rural communities. Following confirmed detections, rapid and science-driven containment measures must be deployed immediately to halt spread. I support fully funding and implementing the containment playbooks established by the USDA and the Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC). A robust response requires enforcing strict livestock movement controls, establishing active surveillance zones, and expanding the production and strategic release of sterile flies. Utilizing the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT), a proven biological method that successfully eradicated the screwworm in past decades ensures Texas relies on sound science rather than reactive measures to safeguard livestock. Effective biosecurity also depends on direct collaboration with local producers. Biosecurity investments must prioritize establishing rigorous veterinary checkpoints, expanding outreach to rural veterinarians, and providing clear educational resources so ranchers can identify and report suspicious wounds early. By pairing state-level agency protocols with on-the-ground support for landowners, Texas can swiftly contain pests, protect herd health, and defend local agricultural markets against economic disruption.
Keywords: New World screwworm, agricultural biosecurity, sterile insect technique, livestock protection, TAHC
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?
The expansion of data centers across Texas brings valuable technological investment, but it also creates heavy, continuous demand on our grid and water infrastructure. Managing this growth requires data-informed policies that protect natural resources without placing an unfair burden on local utility customers. I support requiring transparent, pre-construction resource-impact assessments for major commercial and industrial projects to evaluate their projected electricity and water consumption. Economic development packages and local tax incentives should be structured to require clear community benefits and efficiency standards, ensuring that high-demand facilities invest in onsite energy management or water-recycling capabilities.
Furthermore, state policy must utilize real-time modeling from ERCOT and the Texas Water Development Board to ensure grid capacity and regional water supplies are carefully evaluated before massive developments connect to local systems. By planning ahead and requiring industrial users to account for their resource footprint, Texas can foster economic growth while protecting everyday families and small businesses from rising utility costs or supply strain.
Keywords: Data centers, grid demand, water allocation, utility costs, economic development
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?
Securing a reliable long-term water supply is essential for supporting population growth, mitigating drought, and protecting Texas agriculture. Meeting these challenges requires modernizing municipal infrastructure while working collaboratively with agricultural producers. Because agriculture accounts for a major share of groundwater use, farmers and ranchers must be treated as key partners in state conservation efforts. I support expanding voluntary, incentive-based conservation programs that offer technical and financial assistance to help producers adopt precision irrigation, soil moisture monitoring, and efficient groundwater management tools without harming their economic productivity. At the state level, infrastructure investments must target critical municipal needs, including repairing leaky distribution networks, upgrading aging treatment facilities, and expanding water reuse and desalination technologies. By balancing infrastructure modernization with voluntary agricultural stewardship, Texas can strengthen drought resilience, protect groundwater resources, and ensure sustainable water access for both rural and urban communities.
Keywords: Water infrastructure, groundwater depletion, agricultural conservation, drought resilience, water reuse
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?
Maintaining a dependable power grid is critical for public safety and economic resilience. Soaring demand from residential growth, industrial facilities, and data centers combined with extreme weather requires proactive grid management and capacity planning. To maintain system stability, state regulators must enforce strict weatherization and readiness standards across all generation sources. I support policy solutions that maintain strong dispatchable generation capacity while expanding modern energy storage technologies and distributed energy resources to handle extreme peak demand. Additionally, targeted investments in transmission infrastructure are necessary to move power efficiently across regions during supply bottlenecks. By combining ERCOT’s predictive load forecasting with improved efficiency standards and localized energy storage, Texas can strengthen grid resilience and prevent power shortfalls without shifting unreasonable financial burdens onto residential ratepayers.
Keywords: Grid reliability, ERCOT, power generation, weatherization, energy storage
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?
Academic and clinical research centers across Texas drive life-saving medical discoveries, foster innovation, and generate significant economic activity. Proposals that arbitrarily restrict or cap federal indirect cost reimbursements threaten the operational stability of these vital institutions. Facilities and Administrative (F&A) reimbursements cover essential operational costs such as specialized laboratory infrastructure, biosecurity compliance, utility costs, and advanced scientific equipment that make high-level research possible. Federal cuts to these reimbursements directly impair a university or medical center’s ability to sustain complex research operations. I strongly support state-level advocacy and legislative efforts to defend full research cost recovery for Texas public universities and health systems. Preserving stable federal-state research partnerships ensures Texas retains top-tier scientific talent, advances clinical trials, and maintains its global leadership in biotechnology and medical innovation.
Keywords: NIH funding, research infrastructure, indirect cost recovery, university research, medical innovation
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?
Addressing declines in childhood vaccination rates and preventing outbreaks of communicable diseases requires clear public education and respectful community engagement. Maintaining public health depends on building trust between families, medical professionals, and local institutions. Effective health communications must be grounded in transparency and accessible scientific data rather than top-down directives that undermine public trust. Policymakers should partner with trusted local figures, including pediatricians, school nurses, and community health educators, to address parental questions thoughtfully and directly. Strengthening school-based health resources and ensuring families have ready access to factual health information empowers parents to make informed decisions for their children. Prioritizing open communication and community-level outreach helps safeguard public health, protect vulnerable individuals, and support safe learning environments for all students.
Keywords: Public health, measles, vaccination rates, community engagement, school health resources
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?
Sound public policy relies on empirical data, rigorous research, and objective analysis. Whether evaluating water management strategies, energy grid reliability, or public health measures, lawmakers have a responsibility to base legislative decisions on verifiable scientific evidence. When reviewing complex or competing claims, policymakers should consult multidisciplinary experts, examine study methodologies, and weigh established scientific consensus alongside practical real-world factors. Where public understanding and scientific findings differ, elected officials should focus on transparent communication, explaining the evidence behind policy decisions while remaining attentive to community values and concerns. Grounding legislative work in empirical research ensures that state policy remains practical, objective, and effective over the long term. Combining rigorous data with open public dialogue creates durable solutions that serve the best interests of Texas communities.
Keywords: Scientific evidence, expert input, policymaking process, public transparency, empirical data