Steven Shook
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 a science driven response focused on rapid detection, containment, sterile fly deployment, veterinary surveillance, and stronger agricultural biosecurity infrastructure. I would also support resources for producers and veterinarians to quickly identify and report suspected cases. My approach would be guided by outbreak data and recommendations from USDA, Texas animal-health officials, researchers, veterinarians, and producers so we can protect livestock, prevent further spread, and limit the economic damage to Texas agriculture.
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?
I would support much stronger protections before allowing large scale data center expansion. Data centers should not be permitted to strain local water supplies, destabilize the electric grid, raise utility bills for families, or receive large tax breaks without clear public benefit. I support requiring full disclosure of water and energy use, making developers pay for infrastructure upgrades, limiting development in water stressed areas, and giving local communities greater authority over siting decisions. Economic development should never come at the expense of reliable power, affordable utilities, or our long-term water security.
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 major investment in water infrastructure, flood control, wastewater systems, conservation, and protection of groundwater supplies. Texas’ own planning process recognizes the need to address both flood risk and long term water security, while TCEQ continues to identify impaired waterways across the state.
Agriculture must be part of the solution, not treated as the enemy. I would support working with farmers and ranchers through incentives for efficient irrigation, water conservation, groundwater management, and new technologies that reduce consumption without undermining agricultural productivity. We need to protect Texas’ water supply and the farmers and ranchers who help feed our state and country.
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 would support modernizing and hardening the Texas grid, expanding transmission capacity, weatherizing critical infrastructure, and investing in diverse, reliable energy sources. I would also require large new users, especially data centers, to pay for the grid upgrades their demand creates rather than passing those costs on to families and small businesses. Grid policy should be guided by reliability data, engineering expertise, and the need to keep electricity affordable for Texas consumers.
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 strong, stable federal investment in NIH and oppose arbitrary caps that undermine research infrastructure. Research requires more than individual experiments, it depends on laboratories, equipment, data systems, safety programs, and skilled staff. NIH’s proposed 15% indirect cost cap would replace negotiated institutional rates and has been blocked by a federal court.
Texas should be competing to lead the nation in medical and scientific innovation, not forcing universities and hospitals to scale back research. I would support predictable NIH funding, evidence-based reimbursement of legitimate research costs, and strong accountability to ensure taxpayer dollars are used effectively.
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?
As a healthcare provider, I believe the best approach is to listen to people’s concerns, answer them respectfully, and give them clear information grounded in evidence. Texas’s 2025 measles outbreak resulted in 762 confirmed cases, 99 hospitalizations, and two deaths among unvaccinated school-age children.
I support strong public health surveillance, rapid outbreak response, and ensuring families have easy access to vaccines and trusted medical guidance. The evidence is clear that the MMR vaccine is safe and highly effective, two doses are about 97% effective at preventing measles. Public health policy should be driven by evidence, transparency, and protecting our communities from preventable disease.
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 a central role in policymaking. As a healthcare provider, I have spent my career making high stakes decisions by weighing the best available evidence, expert guidance, risks, and benefits.
When scientific claims conflict, I would look at the quality of the research, whether findings are independently replicated, the strength of the broader evidence, and the views of qualified experts not political convenience. Public opinion matters in a democracy, but facts do not change based on polling. When evidence and public opinion diverge, government has a responsibility to communicate clearly, remain transparent about uncertainty, and make decisions that best protect the public.