Texas

The screwworm problem is definitely an area for scientists to be involved, and I saw that this occurred decades ago with releasing sterile screwworms to nip any epidemics in the bud. I hope this will succeed, and perhaps it did, since the screwworm has been out of the news recently. Apparently USDA had cut funding for this program before this epidemic, which shows that the cattle industry needs to take matters into their own hands from here on, since you can’t really trust government to have your back.

A lot of people are legitimately concerned about so many data centers being proposed all over the state. There are also reasons more data centers are needed, given that AI needs more data capacity. I oppose any taxpayer subsidies to data center companies, and I believe in protecting private property rights. Data centers need to show where their power and water will come from and be sure it doesn’t adversely affect local residents. The power issue may be easier than water, since there are more ways to generate electric power. Local officials must be totally transparent with residents about the effects of the data centers. Note that any politician who says they are opposed to data centers or want a moratorium will probably change their minds after the election.

This is not an issue I know enough about to give you a coherent answer. If elected, I will discuss the issue in detail with those most knowledgeable to see what I could do as Senator to contribute to a reasonable solution.

It’s important that no form of power generation is left behind. I believe in a free market in energy that includes fossil fuels, wind, solar, hydroelectric, and nuclear. Texas needs to be more open to nuclear, and recent research shows that mini-nuclear reactors powered by thorium could be used at data centers or crypto mining operations to have them stay off the main grid. I do oppose eminent domain that forces property owners to have power lines installed on their properties against their wills.

I would prefer to have scientific research conducted by the private sector, not the government. But that can’t change overnight, so there should be funding of current research with an announcement that this will end by a certain date, so private foundations, businesses, etc. can take over. Once that’s done, scientists won’t be dependent on the whims of politicians for funding, especially when there is an anti-science HHS Secretary.

I believe that kids should be vaccinated for measles, and my daughter certainly was, though I wouldn’t force anyone to take a measles vaccine shot. It’s sad that people who were alarmed by the mRNA vaccine for COVID started to look negatively at the totally different measles vaccine that has been used successfully for decades. I’m not a doctor, and my daughter is an adult now, so I don’t know how doctors are promoting vaccines now. But it’s hard to convince people who look through an ideological lens rather than a scientific lens.

I’m certainly in favor of the scientific method of using sensible, reliable data, and determining possible outcomes. This should also be used for most political decisions, since a lot of bad possible results from proposed laws could have been determined up front. I always say that political decisions should be logical and make sense. However, what makes sense to politicians is a solution that helps them serve their big donors and get re-elected, not what’s best for their constituents. Instead I’m determined to look for sensible solutions that are constitutional and would actually solve problems.

I would support rapid surveillance, testing, containment and treatment guided by veterinary science, while strengthening border and livestock-movement safeguards. I would carefully evaluate any expansion of foreign livestock imports while Texas faces an active screwworm threat, prioritizing Texas ranchers and biosecurity over short-term supply concerns. Policy should follow evidence, respect uncertainty, and consider economic realities and Texans’ values.

Keywords: Policy should follow evidence, Rapid surveillance, testing, containment and treatment, Guided by veterinary science, Strengthening border and livestock-movement safeguards, Carefully evaluate foreign livestock imports

I’m not anti-development or anti-AI, but I reject a model where Texans subsidize the infrastructure costs of private companies and their communities suffer from development. I support data-center growth that benefits Texas without shifting its costs onto Texans. I would oppose tax abatements for new data centers, require developers to pay their fair share of grid and water infrastructure, and prioritize communities’ access to reliable utilities. Decisions should be guided by evidence on water availability, grid capacity, land use, and long-term economic benefit, not projected growth alone.

Keywords: Infrastructure, Community, Sustainability ,Growth that benefits Texas without shifting its costs onto Texans, Require developers to pay their fair share, Evidence on water availability, grid capacity, land use, and long-term economic benefit.

The 2025 floods demonstrated the devastating human cost of inadequate flood preparedness. I would strengthen Texas’ Flood Infrastructure Fund, expand funding for flood forecasting, stream gauges and early-warning systems, and prioritize projects that protect lives while providing water-supply benefits. I support expanding aquifer recharge and aquifer storage and recovery where science shows floodwater can be safely captured. Farmers and ranchers should have a meaningful voice in regional water and flood planning, with decisions guided by evidence, local knowledge and respect for uncertainty.

Keywords: Aquifer recharge, Flood Infrastructure Fund, Expand aquifer recharge and aquifer storage and recovery where science shows floodwater can be safely captured, Farmers and ranchers should have a meaningful voice in regional water and flood planning

I support strengthening ERCOT’s reliability planning, expanding transmission and generation where evidence shows it is needed, and requiring large new loads such as data centers to pay their fair share of grid infrastructure. I support demand-response requirements for large loads during emergencies and stronger incentives for battery storage and diverse generation. Reliability decisions should be based on rigorous forecasting, extreme-weather data and long-term demand instead of political pressure.

Keywords: Grid reliability, Demand response, Battery storage, Reliability decisions should be based on rigorous forecasting and extreme-weather data

I would protect competitive federal research funding and oppose arbitrary caps on negotiated indirect-cost rates that undermine the infrastructure supporting scientific research. At the state level, Texas should strengthen matching funds and research partnerships that help universities and hospitals retain researchers and facilities. Scientific funding should be transparent, competitively awarded, and evaluated on evidence, outcomes and public benefit, not political preference.

Keywords: Research infrastructure, Competitive grants, Scientific integrity, Protect competitive federal research funding

I would engage parents with respect, transparency and accessible evidence, not dismiss legitimate concerns about vaccine safety or adverse effects. Parents should be able to ask questions and demand continued research, including better study of potential adverse effects. At the same time, policy must recognize the strong evidence that vaccination reduces serious disease and protects communities. I support informed decision-making, transparent safety monitoring and maintaining reasonable vaccination requirements to prevent outbreaks.

Keywords: Respect, transparency and accessible evidence, Parents should be able to ask questions and demand continued research

Scientific evidence and qualified expert input should be foundational to policymaking, especially on issues where technical facts have measurable consequences. I would evaluate competing claims by examining the quality of the research, methodology, reproducibility, consensus and remaining uncertainty. Public opinion and belief systems deserve respect and consideration, but when they diverge from the evidence, a lawmaker’s responsibility is to make the decision that best serves the public good, even when it is unpopular.

Keywords: Scientific evidence and qualified expert input should be foundational, Evaluate competing claims by examining research quality, methodology, reproducibility and uncertainty, Make the decision that best serves the public good, even when it is unpopular.

Congress should treat this as an eradication campaign, not a press conference. New World screwworm is not a food-safety scare. It does not infest packaged meat. It is a flesh-eating parasite of living warm-blooded animals. Leave it in the herd and you get dead calves, wrecked wildlife, higher beef prices on a herd already at multi-decade lows, and a bill measured in billions.

1. Finish the sterile-fly machine on a wartime clock. 2. Keep science-based quarantines—and make them livable for ranchers. 3. Reopen Mexican livestock ports only with a kill switch. 4. Watch wildlife and pets, not just the sale barn. 5. Pay for detection at the border the way we pay for any other invasion. 6. Hold the long-term lab and producer toolkit.

What I would not support: treating every detection as proof the whole state must shut down commerce; slashing quarantines because they are inconvenient; or assuming Mexico’s paper protocol is a substitute for traps and audits.

Eradicate it. Build the fly plants here. Inspect the border. Help the rancher who reports a wound instead of punishing him. That is agricultural biosecurity.

I support data-center growth that pays cash for the electrons and the water it uses—and I oppose growth that puts that bill on a CPS or SAWS customer in TX-20.

Texas can lead this market. It should not lead it by socializing infrastructure onto families who are already on Stage 3 watering restrictions and watching the ERCOT queue swell to several times the state’s record peak.

I would support, at the federal margin and as a Texas partner: Cost causation in rates. Bring-your-own generation or a binding power-purchase that adds capacity, not just demand. Filter the queue.

No “AI exceptionalism” on winter risk. Potable water is for people. Cooling is a process load. Repeal the blank-check sales-tax holiday for servers and construction. Keep competition for real jobs, not for 20 positions on a billion-dollar box.

Texas’s water problem is not a single shortage. It is a simultaneous flood-and-drought problem plus aging pipes, a growing population, declining groundwater in key aquifers, and widespread surface-water impairments. The 2027 State Water Plan (adopted July 2026) puts the price tag at roughly $174 billion (2023 dollars) through 2080 to produce about 7.6 million acre-feet per year of additional supply under drought-of-record conditions. Conservation and reuse together account for a large share of that volume because they are usually the cheapest and most drought-resilient options. Irrigation remains the largest single use of groundwater.

I would not treat this as a choice between “build more reservoirs” and “make farmers use less water.” The data favor a portfolio that starts with the lowest-cost, highest-certainty measures and then adds new supply only where the economics and hydrology justify it. Property rights, local knowledge, and measurable results should constrain the tools.

Texas’s grid problem is no longer only the 2021 Uri failure. It is now the combination of that winterization lesson, rapid evening net-load ramps as solar drops, localized transmission constraints (especially Far West Texas), and a large-load interconnection queue that is several times current peak demand—most of it data-center and computational load that may or may not actually get built.

Summer 2026 so far has been relatively stable, with batteries covering evening ramps and no conservation appeals issued through late August, but planning reserve margins in ERCOT’s Capacity, Demand and Reserve reports decline sharply later in the decade under high-load-growth cases. Far West Texas already faces pre-contingency load-shed risk under low-wind nighttime conditions.

I would support policies that treat reliability as an engineering and market-design problem rather than a technology or partisan contest. The goal is fewer outages for households and businesses at the lowest sustainable cost, while still allowing economic growth.

I would support keeping the negotiated rate system unless and until Congress replaces it through a transparent process with a model that still covers documented cost. The 2027-present rider exists because Congress already rejected a similar 10% proposal. Repealing it in order to impose a 15% flat rate would be a larger, abrupt transfer of cost onto institutions that planned multi-year labs, animal facilities, and compliance offices around the existing rules.

I would keep Texas’s existing school-entry requirements and the conscientious-exemption pathway. Removing non-medical exemptions after an outbreak in a specific community looks like punishment and is likely to increase underground noncompliance and homeschooling rather than raise durable coverage. HB 1586’s change to a downloadable (still notarized) affidavit lowered a procedural barrier; the subsequent rise in exemptions was predictable. Notarization remains a modest check that the choice is deliberate.

I would put more effort into the delinquency bucket than into new statewide mandates. Requiring schools to close documentation gaps, offering catch-up clinics at enrollment, and funding school nurses produces coverage gains among families who are not ideological objectors.

I would not support a statewide ban on conscientious exemptions, nor a policy that treats every cluster of low coverage as a problem to be solved only by tighter law. Herd-immunity math is real (measles R0 is high; 95% is the conventional target), but so is parental authority over a child’s medical interventions in a state that generally treats that authority as primary. The workable middle is: requirements remain, exemptions remain available with a small amount of process, outbreak tools stay sharp, and public health earns trust by being accurate when it is inconvenient.

At the federal level, I would support stable, high-quality surveillance and open publication of both effectiveness and adverse-event data, and I would oppose using a single year’s outbreak to rewrite the childhood schedule by executive order without the ordinary evidence process. I would also oppose gagging clinicians or parents who report rare harms.

The long-term stability of coverage depends less on the next statute than on whether families believe institutions will tell them the truth when the news is mixed. Two children died in Texas in 2025 from a disease their parents chose not to vaccinate against. That is a fact that should be stated plainly. So is the fact that many of their neighbors will not accept a policy that treats that choice as illegitimate. Policy that ignores either fact will fail.

Science is the best available method for testing claims about the physical world: does this vaccine reduce measles transmission and severe disease; how fast is this aquifer declining; what reserve margin keeps the lights on in August; what do audited F&A costs actually buy. When methods are transparent, results replicate, effect sizes are large, and incentives are not badly distorted, those findings should constrain policy. Ignoring them is not “values”; it is flying blind.

That is not the same as handing the decision to a panel. Experts estimate probabilities and mechanisms. Elected officials weigh those estimates against cost, rights, distributional effects, and what the public will accept and comply with. A republic that treats expert consensus as self-executing law has no place for disagreement about risk tolerance, parental authority, property, or fiscal limits.

Use science to map consequences and to kill policies that cannot survive contact with measurement. Use politics—accountable, constrained by rights and budgets—to choose among the remaining options. Publish the uncertainties. Separate empirical disagreement from moral disagreement. And when the two collide, do not resolve it by declaring one side illegitimate. Resolve it by making the tradeoffs explicit and letting voters fire the people who get them wrong.

New World screwworm is a serious threat to Texas agriculture, and we must respond with both immediate action and stronger long term prevention. I support restoring and strengthening the federal monitoring and detection programs in Central and South America that help identify screwworm before it reaches the United States. Reductions in this surveillance and prevention capacity created vulnerabilities that we cannot afford, particularly given the economic consequences of a large scale outbreak in Texas.

We should also invest in rapid detection, expanded surveillance, veterinary services, research, and proven control measures such as sterile insect releases. Federal and state agencies should work closely with Texas ranchers, veterinarians, researchers, and agricultural organizations to ensure suspected cases are identified and reported quickly.

As a former educator and current Richardson City Councilman, I believe good policy should follow the evidence and rely on the expertise of scientists, veterinarians, and agricultural professionals. Preventing an outbreak is far more effective and less costly than responding after it has spread. I would support federal resources to strengthen agricultural biosecurity, assist producers affected by necessary quarantines or movement restrictions, and ensure that our monitoring and detection systems remain adequately funded.

Protecting Texas agriculture requires treating biosecurity as a long term investment, not something we address only after a crisis reaches our border.

Keywords: Protecting Texas agriculture requires treating biosecurity as a long term investment, not something we address only after a crisis reaches our border.

Data centers can bring significant investment, jobs, and economic opportunity to Texas, but that growth should not come at the expense of our water supply, electric grid, or taxpayers. I support responsible data center development that requires companies to account for the infrastructure costs and resources they consume.

Texas should ensure that large data centers have reliable plans for water use and conservation, particularly in areas facing water stress. We should also require developers to demonstrate how their projects will affect local electric reliability and ensure that large industrial users pay their fair share of the infrastructure needed to serve them rather than shifting those costs to families and small businesses.

I also support reviewing tax incentives based on measurable public benefits. Incentives should have clear performance requirements, transparency, and accountability, including commitments related to jobs, wages, infrastructure, water conservation, and energy efficiency. If a project does not deliver the promised public benefit, taxpayers should not be left carrying the cost.

My approach would be guided by independent scientific and economic analysis, transparent data, and input from local communities, utilities, water experts, and affected residents. As a former educator and current Richardson City Councilman, I believe economic development works best when communities benefit from growth and have a meaningful voice in decisions that affect their future.

Texas should welcome innovation and investment while making sure growth strengthens our communities rather than placing an unfair burden on them.

Keywords: Economic development, Grid reliability, Water conservation

Texas needs a long term, science based water strategy that recognizes both the growing threat of drought and the increasing risk of flooding. I support significant investment in modernizing water infrastructure, repairing aging systems, expanding water storage, improving flood control, and upgrading wastewater treatment and reuse. We should also invest in conservation and technologies that help communities and agriculture use water more efficiently.

Agriculture must be part of the solution, not treated as the problem. Texas farmers and ranchers depend on reliable water supplies, and conservation policies should recognize the economic realities of agriculture. I support incentives for farmers to adopt proven water saving technologies, improve irrigation efficiency, conserve groundwater, and participate in voluntary conservation programs. Federal policy should complement local groundwater management rather than impose a one size fits all approach on Texas communities.

We also need to protect water quality by addressing agricultural runoff, industrial pollution, and aging wastewater infrastructure. Decisions about water policy should be guided by sound science, reliable data, and input from farmers, ranchers, local water districts, communities, and environmental experts.

Texas can support a strong agricultural economy while protecting the water resources that our communities, businesses, and future generations depend on. Our approach should focus on conservation, infrastructure investment, and collaboration rather than waiting for the next drought or flood to force action.

Keywords: Water infrastructure, Water conservation, Drought resilience, Flood control

Texas needs a reliable, affordable, and resilient electric grid that can meet growing demand without placing unreasonable costs on families and small businesses. I support modernizing the grid, expanding transmission capacity, improving weatherization, and investing in a diverse mix of reliable energy resources.

As electricity demand grows, particularly from data centers and other large industrial users, we should ensure that those users pay their fair share of the infrastructure costs required to serve them. Their growth should not result in higher utility bills or reduced reliability for Texas families and small businesses.

I also support expanding energy storage, improving demand response programs, and maintaining adequate reserve capacity to help the grid manage extreme heat and other periods of high demand. Texas should continue to support reliable natural gas generation while also encouraging investment in renewable energy, nuclear power, and emerging technologies that can strengthen grid reliability and diversify our energy supply.

Grid policy should be guided by independent analysis, reliable data, and the lessons learned from past extreme weather events. We should prioritize reliability and affordability while ensuring Texas has the infrastructure necessary to support continued economic growth.

Most importantly, Texans should not have to choose between affordable electricity and a reliable grid. With smart planning and investment, we can achieve both.

Keywords: Energy affordability, Grid modernization, Transmission capacity, Extreme weather resilience

Texas has built a world class research ecosystem that benefits patients, universities, businesses, and communities across the state. I support protecting and strengthening federal investment in institutions that conduct federally funded research, including maintaining reimbursement for the legitimate indirect costs required to operate research facilities, support staff, laboratories, compliance systems, and other essential infrastructure.

Arbitrary reductions in indirect cost reimbursement could force universities and hospitals to reduce research programs, delay new projects, limit opportunities for early career scientists, and shift costs onto students, patients, and state taxpayers. I would oppose efforts to undermine negotiated reimbursement rates without evidence that those changes would improve research efficiency or outcomes.

At the federal level, I support stable and predictable NIH funding, continued investment in basic and applied research, and policies that protect the research workforce and encourage partnerships between universities, hospitals, government, and the private sector. At the state level, Texas should continue supporting research institutions and developing programs that help attract and retain researchers, expand research infrastructure, and translate discoveries into new treatments, technologies, and businesses.

Scientific research is not simply an expense. It is an investment in public health, economic growth, national competitiveness, and the next generation of innovation. Texas should protect the research infrastructure that has made the state a leader in science and medicine rather than weakening it through short term budget decisions.

Keywords: Healthcare innovation, Economic competitiveness, Federal research investment, Research funding stability

Vaccines are one of the most effective public health tools we have, and policy should be guided by the best available scientific evidence. The recent measles outbreak in Texas demonstrates the consequences when vaccination rates fall too low. I support maintaining strong school vaccination requirements, with appropriate medical exemptions, and ensuring families have convenient access to recommended vaccines.

At the same time, public trust cannot be built by dismissing people who have questions or concerns. Policymakers and public health officials should engage communities respectfully, listen to concerns, clearly explain the evidence behind vaccine recommendations, and be transparent about both the benefits and potential risks. Trusted local healthcare providers, educators, and community leaders can play an important role in these conversations.

I would support increased investment in public health education, vaccination access, disease surveillance, and rapid outbreak response. Families should have access to accurate, understandable information from qualified medical and scientific professionals, rather than having to navigate misinformation on their own.

When an infectious disease poses a serious risk to children and communities, protecting public health requires balancing individual concerns with our responsibility to prevent avoidable illness and deaths. My approach would be grounded in science, transparency, respect, and a commitment to protecting Texas families.

Keywords: Disease prevention, public health education, Community engagement, Health care access

Scientific evidence and expert input should play a central role in policymaking. Good policy requires understanding what the evidence tells us, what remains uncertain, and what the likely consequences of different choices will be. I would seek input from qualified scientists, researchers, medical professionals, and other subject matter experts while also listening to the communities affected by a policy.

When scientific claims conflict, I would look at the quality of the research, the strength and consistency of the evidence, the expertise and independence of the sources, and whether findings have been replicated or supported by multiple credible studies. Where uncertainty remains, policymakers should acknowledge it rather than presenting speculation as fact. Policy should also be revisited as new evidence becomes available.

Public opinion is an important part of democratic decision making, but it should not determine what is scientifically true. When public opinion and scientific consensus diverge, my responsibility would be to communicate the evidence clearly, listen respectfully to concerns, and explain why a policy decision is supported by the best available information. Scientists should inform policy, while elected officials remain accountable for making the final decisions.

Science does not answer every question policymakers face. Values, economic considerations, individual rights, and community priorities also matter. But when we are deciding questions that depend on how the world actually works, evidence should be our starting point, not an obstacle to the policy we already want.

Keywords: Science based policymaking, Evidence based policy, Scientific expertise, Research integrity

I started my career as an army paratrooper and became a cybersecurity architect, and both jobs taught me the same lesson: you don’t wait for the breach to build your defenses. Screwworm is a biosecurity breach, and Washington was too slow to see it coming. We let inspection and surveillance capacity atrophy at the exact moment this pest was moving north through Mexico, and now Texas ranchers are paying for that neglect.

I’d support full, sustained funding for USDA-APHIS surveillance and the sterile insect release program that eradicated screwworm the first time — including rebuilding fly production capacity, which took decades to develop and can’t be recreated overnight. I’d back emergency support for veterinarians and ranchers in affected counties, faster indemnification when herds are lost, and stronger coordination with Mexico, since this pest doesn’t respect a border line. And I’d resist any federal budget that cuts USDA animal health inspection staff, because APHIS itself has shown a full-scale outbreak could cost this region billions.

TX-31 isn’t in the current outbreak zone, but our Hill Country ranchers depend on a healthy statewide cattle market, and pests move. This is exactly the kind of problem where the evidence, outbreak data, economic modeling, animal health science, should drive the response, not politics. I’ll always ask the APHIS scientists and Texas veterinarians what they need before I ask what it costs, because the alternative costs far more.

Standout takeaways: Screwworm is a biosecurity breach; you defend against it before it happens, not after. Fully fund USDA-APHIS surveillance and sterile fly production capacity. Faster indemnification and support for affected ranchers and vets. Border coordination with Mexico is essential; the pest doesn’t stop at a map line. Let animal health science and economic data drive the response, not politics.

Keywords: biosecurity, USDA-APHIS, sterile insect technique, ranchers, evidence-based response

Central Texas is ground zero for this fight. Data centers are landing in Temple, Taylor, and Round Rock faster than local water and power systems can absorb them, and too often the deal gets cut before neighbors even know it’s happening. I don’t oppose the jobs and investment data centers can bring. I oppose doing it recklessly and sticking families with the bill.

I’d require large data centers to pay their fair share of the grid upgrades and generation capacity their demand forces onto the system, instead of spreading those costs across residential ratepayers who never asked for a 24/7 industrial scale power draw next door. On water, I’d push for mandatory disclosure of water use, require closed-loop or reclaimed-water cooling systems as a condition of interconnection or tax incentives, and end the practice of handing out state and local tax breaks to projects that haven’t demonstrated they won’t drain the aquifers our farms and towns depend on. Incentives should come with enforceable water and grid-impact standards attached, reviewed with real local input, not decided in a closed room.

The evidence is straightforward: ERCOT’s own demand forecasts have more than doubled in a year, and Texas communities are already seeing rate pressure and water stress tied to this build-out. That’s not a reason to stop growth, it’s a reason to plan it responsibly, with the people who live here at the table.

Standout takeaways: Make data centers pay their fair share of grid and infrastructure costs. Require water disclosure and closed-loop cooling as a condition of doing business here. Tie tax incentives to enforceable water and grid standards, not blank checks. Local communities deserve a seat at the table before projects break ground.

Keywords: fair share, water disclosure, grid costs, local control, tax incentive accountability

Texas is flooding and running dry at the same time, and hundreds of our waterways are too polluted to safely use. That’s not a contradiction, it’s a sign our water infrastructure hasn’t kept pace with our population or our climate. I’d support full, sustained funding for the state water plan, including aquifer storage and recovery, aging pipe and treatment plant replacement, and regional flood infrastructure identified in TWDB planning, paired with real TCEQ enforcement against the industrial and municipal polluters driving those impairment listings.

Agriculture uses the most groundwater in this state, but our farmers and ranchers are also the ones with the most to lose from depletion, and I don’t see them as the problem. I see them as partners. I’d back cost-share programs that help producers adopt efficient irrigation, soil health practices, and water reuse, the same way we’d invest in any infrastructure upgrade, because it pays for itself in water saved. I’d also support voluntary, compensated conservation easements and groundwater conservation district funding, so local farmers and ranchers, who know their land best, have real tools instead of top-down mandates.

This has to be evidence-driven: hydrology data, TCEQ water quality assessments, and TWDB planning models should set priorities, not which region has the most political juice. Rural and urban Texas both lose if we get this wrong.

Standout takeaways: Fully fund the state water plan: aquifer recovery, aging infrastructure, flood planning. Enforce TCEQ water quality standards against real polluters. Treat agriculture as a conservation partner, not a target — fund efficiency upgrades. Let hydrology and water quality data set priorities, not politics.

Keywords: state water plan, agricultural partnership, aquifer conservation, TCEQ enforcement, infrastructure investment

Winter Storm Uri should have ended this debate. We know what fixes reliability: mandatory, verified weatherization of generation and gas supply with real penalties for noncompliance, not the honor system we have now. I’d back a hard weatherization mandate with independent inspection, continued build-out of transmission and battery storage to firm up wind and solar, and diversified generation so no single fuel source or single point of failure can take the whole system down in extreme heat or cold.

Large new loads, data centers chief among them, need to be brought into this picture honestly. I’d require big users to help fund the grid capacity they demand and to participate in demand-response programs during peak strain, instead of quietly consuming headroom that was supposed to serve homes and small businesses. I’d also push for stronger interconnection with neighboring grids as an emergency backstop, without surrendering ERCOT’s ability to move fast on Texas-specific fixes.

ERCOT’s own load forecasts show the strain coming. That’s the evidence base I’d use: real demand data, post-Uri engineering reviews, and independent grid reliability audits, not talking points from whichever industry showed up first. Reliability is a kitchen-table issue for every family in TX-31 who’s paid a spiked summer power bill or worried about a winter outage, and I’ll treat it that way.

Standout takeaways: Mandatory, inspected weatherization with real penalties, not an honor system. Diversify generation and expand transmission and battery storage. Make large loads like data centers help pay for and manage peak demand. Explore stronger emergency interconnection with neighboring grids.

Keywords: grid reliability, weatherization mandate, demand response, transmission and storage, ERCOT accountability

Texas universities and hospitals are running world-class research on $1.9 billion a year in NIH funding, and that money doesn’t just fund lab equipment, it funds the people, the facilities, and the compliance infrastructure that keep patients safe and discoveries moving. A flat 15% indirect cost cap ignores the rates institutions actually negotiated based on real, audited costs, and it would blow a $300 million hole in Texas research overnight. That’s not fiscal discipline, it’s a funding cut dressed up as an efficiency measure, and it would land hardest on cancer centers, teaching hospitals, and public universities that don’t have deep endowments to absorb the gap.

I’d oppose the proposed cap and support legislation protecting negotiated indirect cost rates, along with stable, multiyear NIH appropriations so research institutions can plan for the long term instead of lurching from budget fight to budget fight. At the state level, I’d support Texas stepping up with bridge funding and university system investment to protect jobs and ongoing trials if federal funding gets disrupted, because tens of thousands of Texas jobs and patients mid-treatment shouldn’t be collateral damage in a budget dispute.

This is personal to me as a cybersecurity professional: I’ve seen what happens when institutions get told to do the same mission with a fraction of the infrastructure funding. Research doesn’t get more efficient. It gets less safe, less rigorous, and less reliable.

Standout takeaways: Oppose the 15% NIH indirect cost cap, it’s a cut disguised as reform. Protect negotiated indirect cost rates and push for stable, multi-year NIH funding. Support state-level bridge funding to protect research jobs and ongoing trials. Underfunded infrastructure makes research less rigorous, not more efficient.

Keywords: protect NIH funding, oppose indirect cost cap, research infrastructure, Texas research jobs

I lead with listening, not lecturing. Most parents who hesitate on vaccines aren’t anti-science. They have real questions, and too often the only people talking to them are either dismissive or peddling misinformation. I’d rather have that conversation directly, through trusted local voices, pediatricians, faith leaders, school nurses, than have it happen for me on social media.

But listening doesn’t mean I’ll pretend the evidence is unclear when it isn’t. Texas just had its largest measles outbreak since 1992, two children died, and the kindergarten vaccination rate has been sliding for years. That’s not an abstract statistic. It’s a preventable tragedy. I’d support fully funding Texas DSHS immunization outreach and school-based vaccination access, protecting the school immunization requirements that got us to elimination status in the first place, and making sure exemption processes are transparent rather than a loophole that erodes herd immunity by default. I’d also support restoring public health communication funding so accurate, plain-language information reaches parents before rumors do.

As a father of seven, this isn’t theoretical for me. I made these decisions for my own kids based on what my pediatrician told me, not what I saw online. I’ll treat vaccine-hesitant parents with respect, not contempt, but I won’t blur the line between a good-faith question and a policy that puts other people’s kids at risk of a disease we already knew how to stop.

Standout takeaways: Listen first — most vaccine-hesitant parents have questions, not ideology. Fund trusted local messengers: pediatricians, school nurses, faith leaders. Protect school immunization requirements and close exemption loopholes. Respect for parents’ concerns doesn’t mean abandoning the evidence.

Keywords: vaccine confidence, school immunization requirements, public health funding, listen first, evidence-based

I built my career asking “what happens when this fails” before it does, that’s what cybersecurity work is. I bring the same discipline to policy: get the data, ask the people who actually study the problem, and build in the chance that I’m wrong before it costs someone else.

Concretely, that means I don’t write policy without first talking to the scientists, engineers, and career agency staff closest to the evidence, APHIS veterinarians on screwworm, ERCOT engineers on grid reliability, TCEQ scientists on water quality, NIH-funded researchers on public health. When claims conflict, I weigh them by methodology, replication, and independence from whoever’s funding the study, not by which side shouts louder. We already trust this model in daily life: we regulate aviation because we trust the engineering, we regulate food because we trust the inspections. Policy on energy, water, agriculture, and public health deserves the same rigor.

When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, my job isn’t to pick the popular answer, it’s to be honest about what the evidence shows and explain my reasoning clearly enough that people can see how I got there, even if they still disagree. That’s different from ignoring public concern; real, lived experience often points to problems the data hasn’t caught up to yet, and I take that seriously too. But I won’t abandon evidence-based decisions because they’re politically inconvenient. That’s how you get outbreaks, blackouts, and billion-dollar mistakes.

Standout takeaways: Ask “what happens when this fails” before it does, that’s how I approach policy. Consult the scientists and career experts closest to the evidence, every time. Weigh competing claims by methodology and independence, not volume. When consensus and public opinion diverge, be honest about the evidence and explain the reasoning, don’t just pick the popular answer.

Keywords: evidence-based policymaking, expert consultation, scientific consensus, transparency, accountability

We must listen to top experts in Biology and Entomology to find a solution to the New World screwworm crisis. Elon Musk’s DOGE project cut research and funding for anti-screwworm efforts. We need government decisions to be made with influence from scientific experts, not huckster billionaires or big donors.

Keywords: Elon Musk, huckster

No more tax breaks for data centers or other big energy consumers. No more new fossil fuel energy projects, for data centers or anything else. We must declare a climate emergency and rapidly transition to 100% clean renewable energy. Anyone who still denies the climate crisis doesn’t understand it. We must listen to climate scientists and halt all projects that waste the earth’s precious resources.

The climate crisis hurts our water security, our food supply, and our farmers. We have to get serious, declare a climate emergency, and take meaningful action. There are solutions ready to go – solar energy plus utility-scale batteries is becoming the most cost-effective type of energy! All that stands in the way of saving the planet is the political will to say NO to the fossil fuel industry.

Every choice we make about energy and extreme heat should be informed by input from climate scientists. That is our only chance for a livable planet. People in South Texas know that our summers are getting hotter and our winters are getting shorter. We can’t hide our heads in the sand any longer. No more data centers. No more tax breaks for big energy consumers. We need clean renewable energy. There should be solar panels over every parking spot and on every roof.

The federal government must increase, not decrease, funding for scientific research. The Texas research infrastructure and the jobs it provides are important, but that’s a secondary consideration to the importance of scientific research and advancement for an enlightened civilization.

We need to improve our Texas public schools so that every child gets an excellent education in every subject, including science. Then perhaps future generations would be better equipped to understand the science about vaccines, the climate crisis, and other key issues.

The best government policies are informed by science and logic, and the worst decisions are fueled by fear and ignorance. Often the public understands the scientific consensus, or would be able to understand if anyone tried to explain, but policymakers follow instructions from big donors instead of scientists.

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/

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

I would vote to reinstall the office that controls this department. A lot of these issues have started again simply because Donald and his administration have fought to get rid of “oversight”. Well, that oversight used to save lives.

I don’t support data centers at all. I think the damage they would cause on the environment is not a high enough ROI to make it worth the effort.

We need to continue to support the communities to fight flood damage from hurricanes. We also need to build more water treatment and desalination plants to treat the small amount of resources that we have.

First- Greg needs to be voted out of office. He’s part of the problem. Second- we need to get Texas integrated with the rest of the national power grid.

I would simply support the policies that protect the long-term stability.

Again, we can trace this back to Donald and Robert being in charge. We need to change the messaging that these people put out into the public. Robert Kennedy should be impeached and replaced.

Response not provided to Question 7.

I would support policies for inspectors and training, country of origin tags, and continuing eradication work (instead of defunding it).

I do support a total moratorium at this time because the effects have not been studied long-term on the residents, livestock, and wildlife directly surrounding the centers. If it continues on, I would require investment into infrastructure, continuous monitoring of land and water, studies on the area to make sure there’s no detrimental impact to the community, and job retraining for those displaced.

I support investing in water infrastructure and expanding conservation programs for farmers and ranchers, since agriculture uses the most groundwater in this state but is also our best shot at fixing this if we actually fund the tools that help. Flooding and water scarcity aren’t two separate problems in Texas, they’re the same one. I’d follow what the state’s own water and environmental agencies are finding and make sure federal money backs up what Texas already started instead of duplicating it.

I support real investment in renewable energy, wind, solar, and battery storage, and Texas already leads the country in wind and solar, so this isn’t new ground, it’s building on what already works. I’d also make data centers and other big power users pay for their own grid upgrades instead of sticking regular Texans with the bill, require them to power down during peak demand and heat waves, and push for real transparency on how much electricity they’re actually pulling. Clean energy and grid reliability aren’t opposites, they go together if we pair the investment in renewables with holding the biggest power users accountable.

I support keeping the protection Congress has renewed every year that requires NIH to honor institutions’ own negotiated rates instead of a flat cap. Texas universities and hospitals bring in almost $2 billion a year in NIH funding, and slashing indirect cost reimbursement doesn’t touch admin bloat, it hits the labs, equipment, and staff that actually make the research possible. This isn’t a partisan issue, it’s protecting jobs and medical progress that Texas families depend on.

I approach it with respect, not judgment, because most parents asking questions want straight answers, not a lecture. But I won’t pretend the science is unsettled when it’s not, two kids died in Texas last year from a disease we already got rid of once. I’d support keeping vaccine recommendations in the hands of doctors and researchers instead of political appointees, protecting free vaccine access for kids no matter what changes in Washington, and putting resources into local doctors and community health workers, the people parents actually trust to answer their questions.

I rely on the evidence and expert research first, not what polls well. When the data is solid and researchers agree, I go with it. When the research is still developing or conflicting, I look at how the study was done, who funded it, and whether other researchers have been able to replicate it before I make a call. When public opinion and the actual evidence don’t line up, I still go with what the evidence shows, because these decisions affect people’s health, safety, and money, not just an election.

This is in our backyard now. Since the first confirmed case in June, USDA’s counted 37 domestic cases across Texas. That’s ranchers watching their herds and families losing income.

We must fund the sterile fly shortage. We need 500 million sterile flies a week to beat this; we’re producing 100 million. Congress put up $1.3 billion — I want it spent fast, with oversight, not press releases.

Build permanent domestic capacity. The bipartisan STOP Screwworms Act would fund a US-based sterile fly facility so we’re not dependent on Panama and Mexico. That stops the next crisis before it starts.

Get real information to producers. Most ranchers have never seen a screwworm case — it’s been gone 60 years. I want direct funding to county extension offices and vets in Walker, Waller, and Montgomery Counties for training and a real hotline.

Pair quarantines with relief. TAHC’s containment zones are right, but they cost ranchers money. Any biosecurity response needs a relief fund so small operations aren’t left holding the bag.

The people who pay for a slow response are our ranchers and rural communities — not lobbyists in DC. I’ll fight for the funding and the facility to get ahead of this.

Keywords:- “This is in our backyard.”, “We need 500 million sterile flies a week to beat this — we’re producing about 100 million.”, “Never again dependent on Panama and Mexico for our own biosecurity.”, “Most ranchers have never seen a screwworm case — it’s been gone 60 years.”, “Any biosecurity response needs a relief fund so small operations don’t foot the bill alone.”, “This is a working-family issue, not a DC talking point.”, “I’ll fight for the funding and the boots on the ground — not another press release.”

Texas is on track to become the nation’s top data center market, and ERCOT’s power demand forecast has more than doubled in a year. That’s not a win for Texas families — it’s a warning sign.

End the tax giveaways. These are some of the most profitable companies on earth. They don’t need our subsidies.

Full freight for the grid, or no connection. If a data center needs new transmission lines and substations, the company pays — not families’ utility bills.

Water first. No priority access over ranchers, farmers, and families. Bring your own supply.

Local communities get to say no. That decision shouldn’t be made in Austin for people who never agreed to live next to it.

This industry has been treated like an honored guest. Time it earned its place here instead.

Keywords: “That’s not a win for Texas families — it’s a warning sign.”, “End the tax giveaways.”, “Some of the most profitable companies on earth.”, “Full freight for the grid, or no connection.”, “Water first.”, “Local communities get to say no.”, “This industry has been treated like an honored guest. Time it earned its place here instead.”

I’ve served three years on my rural community’s small water board. I’ve seen firsthand how hard rural systems fight for resources big cities take for granted — this isn’t abstract for me.

Texas floods in some counties and runs dry in others, with hundreds of polluted waterways on top of it. Voters just approved Prop 4, dedicating up to $1 billion a year to the Texas Water Fund starting 2027. Here’s how I’d make it work:

Get funding to rural communities first. Small systems often can’t compete with big-city grant-writing departments. I’d push for direct technical assistance so our counties aren’t left behind.

Treat farmers and ranchers as partners. Ag conservation grants have saved 700,000+ acre-feet of water since 2014 on a shoestring budget. Expand that funding — don’t treat it as an afterthought.

Fix leaks before building new supply, with dedicated grants for rural systems. Most of our rural water lines date back to the 1970s and don’t get replaced until a repair becomes essential. Rural areas can’t afford to fix this on their own — grant funding for line replacement is cheaper in the long run than waiting for failures.

Enforce clean water standards, with grants to help rural systems comply — not just deadlines they can’t afford to meet.

Plan flood and drought together. They’re two sides of the same infrastructure failure.

Water is the most basic promise a state makes its people. I’ll fight to make sure this investment reaches small towns and family farms, not just the cities with the biggest lobbyists.

Keywords: “This isn’t abstract for me.”, “Water is the most basic promise a state makes its people.”, “Most of our water lines date back to the 1970s and don’t get replaced until a repair becomes essential.”, “Rural areas can’t afford to fix this on their own.”, “Treat farmers and ranchers as partners.”, “Fix leaks before building new supply.”, “Not just the cities with the biggest lobbyists.”

ERCOT just broke its demand record — 90,000+ megawatts in July’s heat wave — and we still haven’t solved for winter. Since Uri, we’ve been playing catch-up on a grid with almost no backup if it fails.

Big loads go first during emergencies. Data centers and industrial users curtail before families do.

Build real winter backup. Battery storage and dispatchable power, not just solar and wind.

Weatherize permanently. Regular inspections, real penalties, not a one-time fix.

New large loads prove they won’t destabilize the grid before connecting. Capacity commitments and cost-sharing up front.

Relief from high bills. Texans are paying more for a grid strained by industrial growth they didn’t ask for. I’d push for rate protections and rebates that shield residential customers from costs driven by data centers and large industrial users — not pass that bill down to families.

Grid reliability is life-and-death in extreme heat and cold, not a business issue. I won’t let industrial growth get priority over Texas families, on reliability or on their power bill.

Keywords: “We still haven’t solved for winter.”, “Big loads go first during emergencies.”, “Build real winter backup.”, “Weatherize permanently.”, “New large loads prove they won’t destabilize the grid before connecting.”, “Relief from high bills.”, “I won’t let industrial growth get priority over Texas families, on reliability or on their power bill.”

Courts permanently blocked the 15% indirect cost cap, and the administration didn’t even appeal to the Supreme Court. Texas’s negotiated rates are protected — for now. But the White House’s FY27 budget still calls for the same cap, meaning the fight just moved to Congress. Texas gets $1.9 billion a year in NIH funding across 118 sites — real jobs, real breakthroughs. I won’t let it get gutted through a budget line.

Make the protection permanent law, not just court precedent and yearly appropriations riders.

Oppose any 15% cap revival in the federal budget.

Protect the full infrastructure — lab safety, compliance, equipment — not just headline grants. Cutting indirect costs doesn’t save money, it just shifts the cost.

Defend Texas’s negotiated rates specifically. A flat national cap ignores that our hospitals and universities have different infrastructure needs than anywhere else.

This funding is researchers and lab techs working in Texas right now. I’ll fight any attempt to slash it through the back door of a budget bill.

Keywords: “The fight just moved to Congress.”, “Real jobs, real breakthroughs.”, “Won’t let it get gutted through a budget line.”, “Make the protection permanent law.”, “Cutting indirect costs doesn’t save money, it just shifts the cost.”, “One-size-fits-all is bad policy here.”, “This funding is researchers and lab techs working in Texas right now.”

762 cases, two dead kids, the worst outbreak since 1992, and last year Texas made vaccine exemptions easier to get, not harder. Vaccination rates barely moved while exemptions kept climbing. That’s not a coincidence.

I don’t talk down to families with questions. Most aren’t anti-science, they’re worried and don’t trust a system that’s given them reasons not to. The answer is trusted messengers, not lectures— funding pediatricians, school nurses, and rural clinics to have these conversations directly.

I support keeping medical and religious exemptions on the books. I don’t support making the process easier to game during an active outbreak. An affidavit isn’t a barrier, it’s a basic check.

Texas law already allows schools to exclude exempted, unvaccinated students during a declared outbreak. I’ll fight to make sure that rule is actually enforced, not just sitting on the books— a parent’s right to opt out doesn’t extend to putting other people’s kids at risk once there’s a confirmed outbreak in their district.

I’d fully fund school nurse positions and rural immunization outreach, push real-time public reporting of vaccination and exemption rates by school, and fund free catch-up vaccination clinics in outbreak-prone counties like Gaines.

Sadly two kids died from a disease we eliminated twenty five years ago. That’s a policy failure, not politics. I’ll fight for the funding and enforcement it takes to fix it, not empty reassurances.

Keywords: “That’s not a coincidence.”, “The answer is trusted messengers, not lectures.”, “An affidavit isn’t a barrier, it’s a basic check.”, “A parent’s right to opt out doesn’t extend to putting other people’s kids at risk.”, “Make sure that rule is actually enforced, not just sitting on the books.”, “That’s a policy failure, not politics.”, “The funding and enforcement it takes to fix it, not empty reassurances.”

Evidence comes first, not an afterthought bolted onto a decision I’ve already made.

When claims conflict, I weigh the strength of the evidence, replication, and whether the experts actually work in that field. One outlier study doesn’t outweigh a broad consensus.

When consensus and public opinion diverge, I don’t chase the polls. My job is to tell people the truth and explain it, not tell them what they want to hear. That’s the same approach I take on vaccines, the grid, water, and screwworm response. Ignoring the science to chase applause is how kids die from a disease we already eliminated.

Evidence tells you what’s true. It doesn’t tell you what to do about it, that’s where values come in, and I stay accountable to working families, not donors.

I’ll follow the evidence even when it’s not popular, and I’ll tell people the truth.

Keywords: “Evidence should be the starting point, not an afterthought.”, “I don’t split the difference and call it balance.”, “A single outlier study doesn’t outweigh a broad scientific consensus.”, “My job isn’t to tell people what they want to hear, it’s to tell them the truth.”, “Ignoring the science to chase applause is how you end up with dead kids from a disease we already eliminated.”, “Evidence tells you what’s true. It doesn’t automatically tell you what to do about it.”, “I’ll follow the evidence even when it’s not popular.”

To protect Texas livestock from the devastating threat of the New World screwworm, I strongly support proactive federal biosecurity policies. My commitment to this issue is personal. Volunteering with the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance this past year, I advocated for H.R. 3392—the Stop Screwworms Bill—to protect our local agricultural community from an invasive pest that threatens livestock, damages our agricultural economy, and poses direct risks to human health.

To combat this threat effectively, I focus on three core priorities:

Fully Funding the USDA: We need a responsible federal budget that restores full funding to vital USDA programs. Our farmers and ranchers depend on these resources for disease monitoring, biosecurity, and infrastructure protection.

Protecting Family Farmers: Agricultural policies must prioritize independent family farms over corporate “Big Ag.” This means providing direct support for soil health management, land testing, and rapid response to chemical or pest contaminations.

Restoring Accountability and Speed: Federal emergency relief must reach our agricultural communities without delay. We must eliminate political gridlock and restore checks and balances to ensure funds are deployed efficiently when crises hit.

Key Takeaways & Standout Phrases

Proven Advocacy: Championed H.R. 3392 (Stop Screwworms Bill) with the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance to protect local livestock.

People Over Corporations: Putting family farmers and ranchers first over “Big Ag” interests.

Biosecurity & Funding: Restoring full USDA funding to protect Texas agriculture and secure our food supply.

Gridlock-Free Relief: Restoring accountability so emergency agricultural aid reaches communities without political delay.

Keywords: Protect Family Farmers, Return Checks and balances.

Texas is on track to lead the nation in data center expansion, but we cannot sacrifice grid reliability, water security, or family budgets to subsidize tech conglomerates. As the Democratic Nominee for TX-38—home to Houston’s Energy Corridor—a Realtor®, and a small business owner, my position is simple: tech giants are welcome to innovate in Texas, but they must pay their own way. We need common-sense “purple solutions” that foster economic growth while holding corporations accountable:

Energy & Grid Protection: Developers must fully fund their own grid interconnects, transmission upgrades, and on-site generation. If hyperscale data centers want gigawatts of power, they must co-locate off-grid clean energy or pay dedicated grid-resilience tariffs so working families aren’t hit with higher electric bills.

Water Conservation: Data centers in drought-prone areas must adopt dry-cooling systems or use recycled wastewater. Evaporative cooling cannot be allowed to drain millions of gallons of potable municipal water and rural aquifers daily.

Fiscal Responsibility: We must scale back automatic tax exemptions for hyper-automated facilities. Taxpayer incentives belong to industries that generate sustained, high-volume local jobs—not capital-intensive sites that employ only a few dozen permanent staff.

Neighborhood Guardrails: Municipalities and counties need federal guidelines and local control to enforce strict noise mitigation, generator emissions standards, and zoning setbacks. Massive facilities belong in industrial corridors, not next to subdivisions, schools, or farmland.

Growth and innovation are vital to Texas’s future, but true progress doesn’t shift private costs onto public shoulders. We can power the next generation of computing while protecting the Texas families who keep our state running.

Keywords: Tech giants are welcome to innovate in Texas, but they must pay their own way.

As someone personally affected by Harris County flooding, water security is a critical kitchen-table issue for me. Securing Texas’s water future requires a “purple solution” — putting people first, policy second, and party third to build resilient, sustainable infrastructure.

Fund Emergency & Environmental Protection: We must pass a responsible federal budget that fully funds FEMA and the EPA. Reinstituting and strictly enforcing the Clean Water Act and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) ensures federal agencies assess community impacts before major projects are approved, holding corporate polluters accountable and keeping contaminants out of our local waterways.

Support Family Farmers Over “Big Ag”: Guided by my direct work with local producers and the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance, I support breaking up corporate “Big Ag” to empower family farmers, ranchers, and laborers who genuinely care for the land.

Protect Groundwater & Soil Health: Instead of letting mega-corporations drain Texas aquifers, we must establish federal conservation grants directly for family-owned operations. Building on legislative efforts like the Relief for Farmers Hit with PFAS Act, we can provide direct assistance to test soil, manage chemical runoff, and implement water-saving practices.

By partnering with family farms rather than subsidizing corporate conglomerates, we can secure Texas’s agricultural legacy and protect our precious water resources for future generations.

Keywords: Securing our water future means partnering with family farms rather than subsidizing corporate conglomerates. By providing conservation grants to small producers, we will protect our groundwater and preserve our agricultural legacy.

To improve grid reliability and protect Texas consumers and businesses from soaring utility costs, I support four practical, common-sense energy policies:

Integrate ERCOT into the National Grid: Under its current isolated setup, Congress cannot directly oversee ERCOT. Interconnecting Texas to the national grid will enable federal transparency, mandatory transmission planning, regional coordination, and transparent pricing—preventing corporate price-gouging during extreme weather events.

Hold ERCOT Accountable: While pursuing integration, we must enforce rigorous oversight and transparency for ERCOT, holding them strictly accountable for how they manage the billions in state and public resources entrusted to them.

Restore Checks and Balances to Congress: Building stable, long-term investments in our energy infrastructure requires a functional, responsible federal government. Ending partisan gridlock is essential to securing our national and state grid systems.

Enforce Environmental Standards: We must fully fund agencies like FEMA and strictly enforce the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Federal agencies must assess the environmental, resource, and community impacts of massive industrial projects before allowing them to place additional strain on our electric grid and water supplies.

We must move past partisan gridlock and focus on common-sense solutions that keep our lights on, protect consumer pocketbooks, and secure Texas’s energy future.

Keywords: Integrate ERCOT to the National Grid, Hold ERCOT accountable, Restore checks and balances to Congress, Enforce environmental standards

Texas research institutions are not just engines of medical innovation—they are vital economic anchors that support thousands of local jobs. Arbitrarily capping NIH indirect cost reimbursements at 15% and stripping $300 million in annual support from Texas universities and hospitals is a dangerous policy failure.

To protect our state’s research infrastructure, I will champion four core priorities:

Defend Congress’s Power of the Purse: Reassert constitutional authority over spending so executive agencies cannot unilaterally impose arbitrary funding caps that bypass negotiated institutional rates.

Reject Attacks on Scientific Research: Oppose administrative efforts that politicize grant processes or slash funding, ensuring premier research sites focus on life-saving breakthroughs rather than absorbing massive, sudden deficits.

Pass a Responsible Federal Budget: Secure robust, stable investments for medical research, protecting public partnerships that drive both domestic innovation and economic growth.

Mitigate Harm for Everyday Texans: Apply my three-fold test—How does it help? How does it harm? How do we mitigate that harm?—to block reckless cuts that jeopardize researchers, clinical trial patients, and local workers.

I will stand with Texas institutions to block these NIH funding caps, defend checks and balances, and ensure our state remains a global leader in scientific innovation.

Keywords: Research Infrastructure NIH Funding Caps (Indirect cost reimbursements) Three-fold Test (Help, Harm, Mitigate) Medical & Scientific Innovation Economic Anchors (Local jobs) Checks and Balances

Protecting our children and public safety should never be a shouting match—it’s a human issue, not a partisan one. Extreme politics have blocked real progress on healthcare for too long. To reverse the decline in Texas’s childhood immunization rates and prevent dangerous outbreaks, we must put people first, policy second, and party third through pragmatic, community-first solutions:

Engage Communities with Respect: Rebuilding trust starts by listening to parents without condescension. We must empower trusted local pediatricians, nurses, and faith leaders to share clear safety data, while ensuring total transparency around vaccine formulation and safety trial data so families can make fully informed decisions.

Strengthen Infrastructure and Access: Routine childhood vaccinations must be accessible and affordable for every family. I support funding community health centers, local clinics, and mobile units so cost, insurance status, or zip code never prevent a child from receiving preventative care.

Support School Health Readiness: Public schools are on the front lines of community health. We must properly fund school nurses, campus clinics, and local health departments so schools can track outbreaks, notify parents quickly, and maintain clear safety guidelines without disrupting education.

Fund Independent Medical Research: I support robust federal funding for independent scientific research, rigorous safety reporting, and non-partisan communication to ensure our policies are grounded in proven science.

By listening to families, investing in public healthcare infrastructure, and ensuring accurate information is accessible, we can keep our Texas communities safe, healthy, and informed.

Keywords: “Protecting our children and preventing dangerous outbreaks shouldn’t be a partisan issue—it’s a human one. By listening to families, investing in our public healthcare infrastructure, and making sure accurate information is accessible, we can keep our Texas communities safe, healthy, and informed.”

I believe sound policymaking must be grounded in facts, accountability, and rigorous evidence. Guided by my core principle—Putting PEOPLE first, POLICY second, and PARTY third—I believe we must set aside political posturing and let proven science steer our legislative choices:

Empower Experts and Protect Research: Public health, safety, and environmental agencies must be led by qualified experts acting on rigorous evidence. I support the EXPERTS Act to ensure protective regulations move forward unimpeded by corporate lobbying. We must defend higher education, protect federal workers’ findings, and fully fund agencies like NIOSH to support workers and local communities.

Evaluate Claims Rigorously: Just as I do in business and real estate, I evaluate policy using my strict three-fold test: How does it help? How does it harm? How do we mitigate that harm? We must strictly enforce NEPA for thorough environmental impact assessments and rely on independent, peer-reviewed data rather than corporate-sponsored studies.

Bridge the Gap Respectfully: When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, we need a “purple solution.” Shouting down skepticism only breeds distrust. We must listen to families respectfully, empower trusted local voices like pediatricians and farmers, and commit to radical transparency by making safety trial results and research data open to everyone.

By grounding our decisions in proven science, acting with transparency, and treating community concerns with respect, we can build a government that is truly accountable, just, and safe for everyone.

Keywords: “By grounding our decisions in proven science, acting with transparency, and treating our community’s concerns with respect, we can build a government that is truly accountable, just, and safe for everyone.”

Part of the problems that we are encountering in relation to biosecurity is that we are prioritizing efficiency and profitability over security and sustainability. It is unfair to everyone in society to sacrifice safety in the name of profit, and my term in Congress would be defined by my ardent adherence to biosecurity specialist’s recommendations for the future of our outbreak prevention abilities and outbreak containment.

Keywords: Sustainability

I advocate for a complete ban on data centers. They provide nothing for the average constituent besides harm and hardship. I am accountable only to the people, not the corporations.

Keywords: Ban Data Centers

I am of the belief that access to water is a fundamental human right. The people that maintain our water supply have been sounding the alarm bells about these issues for years and it’s high time that we elect someone that will give them the time of day. As a vegan, I know that plant-based diets use significantly less water resources in their production compared to animal agriculture and, as such, would advocate for programs that help the state understand and promote what healthy plant-based diets can do for our environment, our health, and animal welfare. On top of that, I will support any and all improvements to our water infrastructure, flood prevention, and conservation programs, which will have a beneficial impact for farmers and consumers alike.

Keywords: Water is a Human Right

I believe that data centers should be banned, we lived without them before and have heard no reasonable argument to be shoving them down our throats. Along with that, the scientific community has shown that we must make a quick and clean shift to reliable forms of renewable energy, such as solar and wind. The evidence is clear, public approval for these positions are overwhelming, and our government must listen to the will of the people.

Keywords: Ban Data Centers, Renewable Energy

Texas is a leader in research and have been doing so much with so little for too long. I would be proud to support a large increase in NIH funding as I believe that we have under-funded our institutions and must correct for past mistakes.

Keywords: Increase NIH Funding

Vaccine skepticism is simply a failure in communication. Politicians and disinformation campaigns have spread across the country as an infectious disease of its own. While I believe that it is always better to persuade an individual on the personal and society-wide benefits of vaccinations, I also believe that mandatory immunization laws are critical for protecting public health. Combined with public information campaigns emphasizing the safety of vaccines and the effects of complications during outbreaks, I am confident that we can reach immunization rates close to 99%.

Keywords: Vaccine Communication

Scientists have one of the greatest burdens in society today: the knowledge and data on what is best to do, but unable to get a hold of any ears in policy-making. Politicians often do too much talking and not enough listening. As a man of good conscious, I compelled to always listen to expert opinion on a topic and advocate for those opinions to my constituents and Congress. If scientific consensus and public opinion do not align, it is my job to make them align. The scientific community will always have a friend in Congress with me.

Keywords: Trust the Experts

Fully fund inspectors back to previous levels and restore funding to make the Screwworm Adult Suppression System fully active. We know this system works. It’s been close to 50 years of eradication in the U.S. and Mexico. We understand the science behind eradication, and the scientific research is solid (for example, the paper An Overview of the Components of AW-IPM Campaigns against the New World Screwworm demonstrates the history of successful eradication methods. What we’ve done, unfortunately, is to turn our backs on the overwhelming evidence and we have neglected to fund programs that work.

Keywords: Restore funding for inspectors and for the SASS system.

I will dispute the economic benefits. These hyperscaler data centers are extractive to both the economy and environment. The district I’m in is on the nation’s largest fresh water aquifer, and we are draining that water at an alarming rate. Add data centers, and the loss is more severe, especially now in a time of significant drought.

I support a freeze on data center construction until we have complete transparency on costs and environmental affects. No public official should sign an NDA with a private company. That obscures the truth and hides backroom deals.

When we talk about energy allocation and costs, data centers not only should pay exactly what their grid power costs, but they absolutely need to pay for the costs of building out the power infrastructure. This is a true hidden cost right now, and power companies and billing regular people for something that should not be something they pay for.

Local and state tax incentives have warped the incentives for everyone. And the federal tax deductions for this construction has only exacerbated the rush to build. The financial models around AI and LLMs are fragile (which is an understatement), and the technology is simply normal, regular tech. It’s not some kind of magical thing that we hear about. My first patent in 1999 is on a type of computer automation. AI is simply modern automation, and it automates to the mean. It’s a statistical computation engine, and it can only do what is average.

This means we tax the automation processes. We tax the robots. We tax not just labor but capital put into these insane capital expenditures. We tax the large corporations who have one goal: replace human intellectual work with automated work.

Keywords: Extractive economically. Extractive on resources.

My first priority in national office is to quickly find the funding to set up a true scientific and research hub in the Texas Panhandle to replenish the water in the Ogallala aquifer. Every conversation, every discussion, about the water source for 20% of the nation’s agriculture is around its use but never around replacement. People say we have 50 years of water left. But we don’t talk about year 51. (And 50 is a very, very optimistic number; there are towns now in the panhandle that have no water.)

We need better incentives for farmers and ranchers to invest heavily in water reclamation and more efficient watering methods. This is a long conversation about crops, soil, evaporation, the role of playa lakes, and how to manage our water the best way and the most sustainable way for the future.

Keywords: Replenish the aquifer

Increase incentives and investment in green energy. Texas, until recently, had done a good job at making this transition away from fossil fuels. But we still need investment in research around battery and energy storage solutions, including clever answers using heated salt and solar thermal.

I would like to massively increase our research budget into nuclear fusion. We have fallen behind South Korea, China, and Europe, and right now we’re losing our brightest scientific minds to those countries

The best energy is energy we don’t use. We should be better incentives for home insulation, heat pumps, and solar microgrids for localized energy production.

Keywords: Renewable energy, fusion research

I am a mentor for the National Science Foundation I-Corp program, and I am a member of the National Academy of Inventors. What we’re doing with our funding of NIH programs and NSF programs is reprehensible. The United States used to be the leader of the world in science, research, and progress. Starving our universities and their research facility is a death blow.

I support increasing NIH (and NSF) funding, which increase was in the 2026 appropriations bill. The most important policy I support, however, is reclaiming Congress’ power over the money. Right now the executive is running all over Congress, making the entire branch of government superfluous. The most important task is to stand for the people, for science, and for the rule of the Constitution. That gives Congress the power to allocate the money.

Keywords: Increase funding to the NIH and NSF. Reclaim Congress’s authority

I support vaccines and vaccine schedules for children (and for the military). Even now I talk with people in this district about the increasing number of measles cases and the direct connection to lack of vaccination. Transmitting an infectious diseases is not a personal choice. It’s a public health matter. It’s absolutely insane that we are ignoring the benefit of vaccines, which are the most successful and powerful medical innovation humans have ever developed.

We need more community communication about the benefits of good health and good science. We have ceded that to cable TV and self-proclaimed “experts” who have absolutely no knowledge of the research and diligent work that has, for more than 50 years, gone into making public health safe for everyone.

All good decisions should come from following inquiry and the scientific method. We should have reasonable debates on the scientific merits, and apply critical thinking to every policy consideration. For too long these debates have become frantic arguments based not in rational discourse, but in political theater. We should always base good policy in arguments we present in good faith, with a good understanding of details.

When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, we have not done a good job explaining the science or, at the very least, being persuasive about where the facts take us. Not one owns different facts, just interpretations. And we can dilute those interpretations by applying rigorous standards of analysis and reproducibility.

I will ask the experts. If the scientific claims lack certainty, let’s look for consensus from the best minds we have. The role of subject expertise does not belong in Congress. We are elected to listen, find the experts, and guide the policy.

The first two confirmed U.S. cases in this outbreak were calves in Zavala County, right here in TX-23. Since then, cases have spread through ranching counties across this district, and state movement-control zones now touch several TX-23 counties. This is not a distant or theoretical threat. It began in the communities I am running to represent.

The immediate job is to make sure a rancher who finds a suspicious wound can get help quickly. USDA needs veterinarians and testing close to affected communities, along with clear information about where cases are appearing and what the rules are. Ranchers who report early and follow containment rules should receive help with reasonable testing, treatment, and outbreak-related losses.

Congress should also fund permanent U.S. sterile-fly production and continued dispersal in Texas. That technique eliminated screwworm from this country before. Because this district runs along the border, close cooperation with Mexico is also essential.

When this outbreak ends, the investment cannot end with it. This threat should be the warning that finally leads to stronger rural veterinary access and livestock surveillance across South and West Texas.

The economic benefits that data centers may bring needs be weighed against the costs communities bear: large tax breaks, enormous power and water consumption, reduced quality of life, and higher bills. I support a temporary moratorium on new data centers until affected communities have been heard and enforceable protections are in place.

In a district where families, farmers, and small towns already worry about water, data centers need to disclose before being approved their projected water and power use, the number of permanent jobs they will create, and other strains they will place on infrastructure. They need to pay for the grid and water upgrades their projects require. Local residents should have this information in advance, and local governments should have the authority to approve, reject, or place conditions on projects before construction begins. Until rules and protections are in place and communities have a meaningful role in these decisions, no new project should move forward.

In Congress, I will oppose federal efforts to override stronger state or local protections.

From western Bexar County to the Big Bend, the solutions to flood control and water scarcity will not all look the same. A town can be repairing flood damage while a ranch a few counties away is facing a drought.

I would seek federal funds to fix leaking systems, improve drainage, install flood warning systems, and modernize wastewater plants. Small towns usually know the right solutions for the community but lack the staff to chase complicated grants. Federal programs should include assistance for actually seeking the help. Farmers and ranchers should be partners. We also need sound groundwater data and real enforcement against major polluters. Local and regional water planning should guide where federal dollars go, because the people who live with these conditions understand them best.

In Congress I would focus on the federal tools that can help: upgrading existing lines, supporting storage, protecting critical systems from cyberattacks, and ensuring backup power exists for hospitals, water systems, and other critical infrastructure. Texas also needs serious weatherization and better coordination between the power generation and transmission systems. More generation does not help if it cannot work in extreme weather or reach the customers who need it.

Large new users, including data centers, should pay for the infrastructure their demand requires and reduce nonessential use during an emergency. Those costs should not quietly land on residential customers. Texas also needs a diverse mix of dependable energy sources and realistic planning for extreme weather and rising demand.

I oppose the cap and support the longstanding system of negotiating and auditing these costs institution by institution. Congress should also prevent retroactive rule changes that leave universities and hospitals holding bills the federal government has already agreed to cover. At the same time, NIH should audit claims closely and make the rules easy for the public to see. This also hits close to home. San Antonio’s hospitals, universities, researchers, and patients all benefit from NIH-supported work. Those dollars support jobs and clinical trials today that could lead to treatments we may all need tomorrow.

As a mother of four and former teacher, I understand why parents take questions about their children’s health seriously. I also know that one child’s health can affect an entire classroom. But parents also deserve straight answers, not condescending lectures about what choices they should make for their kids and their families. The best messenger is often someone a family already trusts, not a politician. Information should be easy to understand and access, available in multiple languages, and honest about benefits and possible side effects.

Congress should protect the Vaccines for Children program, support local disease surveillance, and make vaccines easier to reach through rural, mobile, and school-based clinics. When an outbreak occurs, communities need quick testing and timely public information. I support requirements based on established medical evidence, with legitimate medical exemptions, because children who are too young or medically unable to be vaccinated also deserve protection.

I think scientific evidence and expert input should serve a central role in the policymaking process. Still, as a member of Congress, I would look at the overall body of research, not select the one study that supports the answer I already wanted. I would ask whether the work was well designed, whether other researchers can reproduce the result, and whether anyone involved has a conflict of interest. I would also listen to the people who will have to live with or carry out the policy. When qualified experts disagree, I want to know why and how much the disagreement matters. Sometimes the responsible course is to start small, measure the results, and adjust as better information becomes available.

Public opinion matters when elected officials weigh priorities, costs, and values. It does not change whether a factual claim is true. My responsibility is to explain both the evidence I relied on and the judgment I made, and to be clear about what new facts would cause me to reconsider.

I always trust and listen to the experts. The first step would be to put previous regulations back in place. Second would be to coordinate between scientists and farmers to get the situation under control. Right now I am hearing of plans to quarantine sections of a ranch as a short term prevention option.

Keywords: I always trust and listen to the experts.

I do not support data centers in any way, my district feels the same. Most of my district is rural farm land which is about to be under imminent domain for data centers to open. All while people in my district don’t have drinking water. Now they want to take even more water and land from them. Not even counting the fact that ERCOT can’t stay online when there is a slight chill in the air. Now they want to significantly increase electricity demand. It does not make sense.

Keywords: My people don’t have clean drinking water, now they want to take even more from them. I do not support data centers in any way.

My district is in deep need for clean water. I am not cocky or naive enough to think I know better than experts. It is a serious issue that is always at the top of my list. Again, I trust experts.

Reconnect our electricity to the national grid. ERCOT is clearly not able to support our states needs without putting lives at risk.

I intend to tax billionaires and corporations enough to cover funding for all of our government programs.

I am a big supporter of vaccine education. I speak to people in a way they understand. The arguments are normally “our body has a defense system” or something along the lines. I describe vaccines this way: Vaccines are just a dead version of an illness that teaches your body how to defend itself. Think of it as giving a wanted poster to your bodies security guards. They can stop illness at the door once they know what to look for. If that doesn’t work, I mention details about Andrew Wakefield, and how his study was with only 12 children, and he lost his license for scientific fraud.

Always trust science. Science is not an opinion, it is absolute and verifiable fact. My skill is looking at something and understanding the intent behind it. Less accurate information tends to rely on buzz words or assumptions to bridge a gap in logic. Beyond that, I would trust the scientist with the most experience and most thorough information. Public opinion is just that, an opinion. Deadly diseases don’t care about opinions, neither do I. It is my job to explain that to the public and defend the facts.

So I’m not an expert on any scientific issue, really, but I know that we need to be listening to the scientific experts. They’re telling us that we should have been investing in prevention measures like breeding sterile flies for decades. I know we had some of that going, but current and prior administrations really dropped the ball.

This issue directly affects my district. We need to ramp up sterile fly production the same way we ramped up vaccine production during COVID. We need comprehensive screening and monitoring of livestock on the ground and to quarantine quickly and aggressively any livestock that is infected.

I’m sure there is more that we should be doing, so I would want to hear from actual experts in the field and then do what they tell us need to be done.

The people in my district do not want data centers in their counties. I don’t believe a large-scale moratorium is realistic, but I do believe that the state legislature needs to change the law and allow counties and unincorporated areas to have more power over what kind of industry is built in their areas.

In addition, I’d want to see legislation passed that requires data centers to provide very detailed documentation on how much water will be used, how much electricity, the effects of pollution if they decide to build their own power plant, the effect on the environment and local wildlife, how much noise and light pollution will be generated, and how many permanent jobs will be guaranteed (and they should be union jobs).

So again, I’m not an expert on this, but I do know that we are not taking water concerns nearly as seriously as we should be taking them. We should be building new reservoirs, recharging our aquifers when we have large amounts of rain, upgrading our infrastructure to minimize water loss, and placing conservation burdens not just on the farmers and residents, but on industry. We also need to invest in research on new technologies – desalinization and re-use of brackish and/or non-potable water.

If you don’t currently have the ability to support a new industrial customer, you don’t ask the taxpayers to pay to bring them on unless you have enforceable commitments on benefits that you will obtain from that industrial customer. We should be investing in creative ways to create, store and transport energy that minimizes water usage and damage to the environment.

One of the greatest shames (and there were many) of the Trump administration was the long-term damage it did to our scientific communities and the research they’ve been doing. We need to move control of federal research grants away from the president and put them under Congressional control, or pass legislation that will prevent something like this from happening again. (Obviously Congress needs to reinstate these grants and reimbursements ASAP.)

I am a pro-vaccination person. However, I believe we live in a time when people do not trust the government or the medical community, so I don’t know that mandatory vaccination policies will necessarily combat that. It may make it worse. I would support massive public outreach and education to teach people about how vaccines are made and how they literally save millions of lives. That will need to start with a new presidential administration, unfortunately.

My non-fancy answer: We have the scientific method for a reason. I believe that when an idea has been tested and argued about enough that the majority of the reputable scientific community agrees with it, it is probably a safe bet that it is a good idea. We need to do a much better job of empathizing with people’s fears and then showing them – in person if necessary – how the scientific community came to that conclusion.

I love the idea of sponsoring science scholarships for kids in “science-adverse” communities. Engaging in outreach by showing people how devices are made, how vaccines are manufactured – show them the work that we did to get where we are.

My first thought is that we have State Agencies that work closely with our top universities like UT and Texas A&M. From what I’ve read, the female screwworm mates only once and then dies. The best attack is to produce sterile male screwworms and introduce them to the female population. When the males and females mate, the reproduction cycle is destroyed and there are no new screwworms born. The entities best suited to create these sterile male screwworms are the state agencies and university labs that are setup to create the required sterile male screwworms. I know the state and universities have done similar things in the past and I’m sure they’re working on it right now.

Keywords: State Universities and state agencies combine forces to create sterile male screwworms to halt the reproduction cycle of the screwworms.

In February of 2021, 246 deaths were attributed to the severe sub-freezing winter storm (Winter Storm Uri) and subsequent power crisis. However, independent data analyses and statistical studies estimate the true death toll was significantly higher, ranging upwards of 700 or more due to uncounted indirect medical and hypothermia complications. The leading causes of death were hypothermia and frostbite (65%). Other causes were exacerbation of chronic illnesses like disruptions to essential medical care, such as home oxygen or dialysis machines failing during power blackouts. Also, carbon monoxide poisoning resulting from unsafe attempts to heat homes using vehicles in garages, generators, or grills indoors. Vehicle accidents, fires, and falls that were caused by treacherous icy roads and alternative heating methods. In other words, Texans suffered greatly in 2021 because our power grid fell woefully short. The question is if we become the leading data center in the country and it uses up twice as much energy as is being used now, how do we know our citizens in the next big winter storm will be protected if these data centers gobble up our energy? The energy policy that I would support would first take care of the citizens of Texas in a severe winter storm. The data centers should come second.

Keywords: 246 deaths in winter storm of 2021. Texas citizens first, data centers’ energy demands second.

Threatened water quality for communities across our state. Let’s take a look at how Lake Michigan was cleared up back in 1972. Lake Michigan was so polluted that you couldn’t even fish in it, yet today, you can. What did they do? They enacted the 1972 Clean Water Act and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement between the U.S. and Canada. Governments and groups upgraded sewage plants, banned harsh chemicals like DDT, limited phosphorus in fertilizers, and cleaned up industrial toxic waste sites. I think we could use this as a good starting point to clean up our Texas waterways. It’s amazing how the environment will clean up itself when the major pollutants are removed. With regard to individual usage, a page might be taken out of what some countries in South America have done. Individuals have machines like small refrigerators that de-humidify the air in their homes and apartments. I believe they use this as drinking and washing water. In countries like Chile and Peru, they desalinate water mainly using reverse osmosis (RO). High-pressure pumps push seawater through special filters to trap salt. This clean water supplies mining sites, coastal cities, and dry regions. I just recently purchased a dehumidifier myself. This dehumidifier pulls around 4 to 5 gallons out of the air per day which I pour around my garden plants and along my foundation. I’ve been trying to figure out how to clean and store these 4/5 gallons per day. I’ve got some ideas. When I was in the Army we were given a steel pot (helmet) amount of water to bathe with each day. Believe it or not, you can bathe with a small amount of water if need be. With respect to aquifers, we are north of the Gulf of America (Mexico.) Countries in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, and Qatar produce a huge share of their drinking water by removing salt from ocean water using reverse osmosis and thermal distillation. I think some creative use of the water in the Gulf could be pumped up to the communities and the aquifers in Texas. Obviously, this will not be cheap, but now might be the time to get started and get our best brains thinking about this issue. Currently, Texas uses replace and manage Aquifer Water Storage and Recovery (ASR). Systems pump excess surface water (like river water or treated drinking water) underground during wet times. It stays stored safely out of the sun and is pumped back up during dry summer months or severe droughts. Also, local groups and counties form groundwater conservation districts to set rules on how much water big users and well owners can pump out. And finally, the Texas Water Development Board tracks water supplies and designs long-term strategies to fund massive water infrastructure projects across the state.

As for overarching policies, I think individuals and communities could look into using dehumidifiers as a start in creating off-grid water supplies. As for the agricultural economy, they should be at the head of the line when it comes to using aquifer resources.

Keywords: Desalination, Reverse osmosis, Gulf ASR Aquifer, Water Storage and Recovery, Texas Water Development Board

Depending upon where you look, death from the freezing temperatures in Feb of 2021 varied from 246 to a high of 700. The ads in the media have been telling us that data centers will add jobs to the Texas economy. What they fail to mention is that these data centers will eat up half of the energy when they come into operation. Well, my question is that if we had problems in 2021 with the delivery of energy that killed from 246 to 700 people, what will the death toll be when half of the energy in sucked up by the data centers in the next bad winter? At the peak of the 2021 storm, peak electricity demand on the ERCOT grid reached roughly 77,000 MW, with a severe shortage of generation as plants froze. Texas has added over 40,000 MW since the 2021 storm. But this looks like this will be used up by the data centers. So if the grid was putting out 77,000 MW and we had over 700 people die, it sounds like we need to create upwards of another 77,000 MW to make up for the data center usage. But we’ve added ONLY 40,000 MW. The ads on TV paint a rosy picture of jobs, jobs and more jobs. But it doesn’t sound like it’s adding up to me. We should make sure that citizens are protected first, and data centers second. If business needs these data centers they can come up with a good solution so that they don’t run out of energy during a bad Texas winter. The burden should be on the businesses that want these data centers, not the Texas government or the surrounding communities. And if the investment is worth it, the data center companies will make it work. That’s what companies and investors are all about. Perhaps they should create a second grid that is separate from and dedicated only to the data centers. The companies and investors can come up with the funds necessary to protect their precious investment. The government should protect it’s most precious commodity, namely, the people living in their communities. Trust me, if there is money to be made with data centers in Texas, the investors will make it work. But let’s take care of the people first.

Keywords: Data centers, Shortage of electricity, Production, People first, data centers second

The following policies would protect the long-term stability of Texas’s research infrastructure. First, we need to increase funding for state programs like the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board initiatives to provide steady revenue for emerging research universities and the National Research University Fund (NRUF). Second, create state matching grant programs that encourage private-sector partnerships and match federal research awards won by Texas institutions. Third, allocate dedicated state bonds or budget surpluses to modernize high-performance computing centers and aging campus labs, and specialized equipment. Fourth, maintain predictable, multi-year funding increases for major federal science agencies like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. And finally, fully fund institutional overhead and indirect cost recovery rates for universities to ensure safe and compliant lab operations.

To do solid research requires top-notch academics backed up with state-of-the-art facilities which will attract the most qualified students from here and abroad. To do this requires funds. So we look to private companies like drug companies to help out. To attract top-notch academics requires good salaries. These, added to outlays by the Federal Government, will insure that Texas will be at the leading edge of future research discoveries and will be a main driver in the future of medical drug discoveries and scientific innovation.

Keywords: Solid research, State-of-the-art facilities attract scientific innovation, Top-notch academics

I grew up when polio was supposedly wiped out all over the world. The scientists went all over the world and vaccinated all of the children and achieved what they believed to be a complete destruction of the virus. Unfortunately, there have been pockets around the globe where polio is still a concern. Why? Because the science in this area is not perfect. There is a thing called herd immunity. To achieve herd immunity against poliovirus, a community must maintain a vaccination coverage rate of at least 80% to 85%. But in a densely populated or poor hygiene area, the percentage might need to be as high as 97%. So, at least in the US, we’ve taken it for granted that vaccinations for polio were adequate only to find out that maybe we’ve fallen short and that this applies to measles, also. So we’re finding out about “herd immunity” and how it’s is possible to have a measles outbreak even given our excellent standard of care in our country. So what’s the lesson? Yes, we have an excellent immunization system, but if not carefully monitored we can still have problems. My approach would be to simply inform the parents of communities what are the dangers of outbreaks and vaccine safety and encourage parents to talk with their pediatricians on what is the best course of action for their children (This what my wife and I did for our two children when they were younger.) Doctors are in communication with local health officials who are in turn in communication with the CDC. The CDC should have an idea as to where the local community stands and with this knowledge local doctors should have a good idea what parents should do to protect their children.

Keywords: Children, Pediatrician, Herd immunity, Vaccination, Coverage rate, CDC

Hopefully the individuals who are making policymaking decisions when it involves some type of scientific claim have some understanding of science. I took Anatomy and Physiology courses with the possibility of working in the Medical Field. It consisted of 30 hours in two summer sessions. I had straight A’s for those 30 hours and made the President’s List at UTRGV. I am also certified to teach all science subjects up to grade 12. So I think I have a good background in science. So when it comes to making scientific claims I think I’ll have a better than average understanding of those claims. So when scientific consensus and public opinion diverge (note the question says scientific consensus as if there will be an agreement amongst the scientists and public opinion as if the general public will have an opposite opinion) this shows bias in the question. But normally questions of high importance will go to a committee to evaluate the issue at hand. Then the committee will report its findings with input from the public. At the end of which a final decision will be made. And then it goes to the legislative body for a final vote. If it passes, it becomes law. Then if the public has a problem with the law it will make it’s way to the courts. Not a perfect system, but that’s what makes us a country which is the envy of all the others.

Keywords: Scientific claims, Public opinion, Consensus law, courts

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

It appears the outbreak was well handled with the release of sterile flies and notification. The prevention side could be improved. The Governor of Texas does not directly have authority on the matter since we elect an Agriculture Commissioner and the legislature controls the budget, but the Governor can lead and ensure emergency response is planned and coordinated.

https://patdixon.org/free-market-sustainability/ addresses sustainable resources, and https://patdixon.org/ai/ addressed potential danger of artificial intelligence. Free market sustainability means growth pays for itself. It requires those who impact demand for resources to pay for them. It welcomes growth and rewards those that cover all of their costs and succeed. It recognizes that growth can originate from anyone with an idea that organically and locally grows their business. It opposes the taxpayer funded corporate welfare policies that Texas has imposed for many years. Regarding AI regulation, in a free market, there are 3 forms of regulation: the market, the rule of law, and predictive regulation. The rule of law on AI may be immature, and we should not jump to predictive regulation that would stifle or shut down progress without defining harm first.

Keywords: Improved prevention, ensure emergency response is planned and coordinated

https://patdixon.org/free-market-sustainability/ addresses sustainable resources. “A Thirsty Land: The Fight for Water in Texas” by Seamus McGraw is an excellent reference. The moon shot would be diverting water from flood areas to drought areas, but the pumping capacity would be an enormous energy demand. Gray water reuse where potable water is not required is a good idea. LCRA has stated that thinning out brush (like ash juniper) could have a significant impact. Ultimately it is imperative that water is priced based on supply and demand to cover the capital infrastructure costs as well as operational and maintenance costs, while promoting conservation through free market incentives.

Keywords: Free market sustainability, Rule of law

https://patdixon.org/free-market-sustainability/ addresses sustainable resources. One of the challenges is the long lead times on transformers. Diversified energy sources provide competition and choice, and mitigate risk of capacity shortages. It is important that large load interconnect fees cover the cost of additional demand. As stated in Free Market Sustainability, any impact on growth (data centers, heavy industry, housing, etc) need to cover the cost of growth (power, water, roads, schools, emergency services, law enforcement, etc). No more corporate welfare.

Keywords: Free market sustainability

The Governor of Texas does not have a lot of influence over NIH funding. That is an issue better addressed by federal legislators. Of course we all want to see productive research that improves health. As a Libertarian I would like to see more investment from voluntary means than through coercive means. There is controversy over the NIH directing funds to gain of function research and other questionable efforts. If any of the accusations by RFK Jr are legitimate they should be investigated and prosecuted. As Governor and a Libertarian I would defend individual liberty and oppose mandates. For more detail see https://patdixon.org/covid/

Keywords: Free market sustainability

As Governor there is a leadership role in informing the public, but each individual makes their own choice about their health. Nobody should be forced to do something to their body. I am concerned that some may have been scared about vaccines and this could be causing the measles cases to climb. It is hard to know who to trust, but this discussion should not be in an echo chamber. A Governor can lead an open discussion so that the public knows the benefits and risks so that they can make informed decisions.

Keywords: I support voluntary funding, defend individual liberty and oppose mandates

I am a professional engineer and rely heavily on well founded and tested scientific and engineering principles. Science and logical reasoning leads the way on seeking the truth, but it needs to be recognized individuals have the right to be illogical concerning themselves. Liberty means only you have authority over yourself and your property. Policies can be based on sound science while ensuring liberty is preserved. I also recognize that you cannot please everyone and you have to be able to make decisions that are not politically popular. My experience in elected office and as a basketball official shows I can do this, and that is one of the many reasons I admire Sam Houston.

Keywords: A Governor can lead an open discussion so that the public knows the benefits and risks so that they can make informed decisions.

This is a new area of concern for me, and as someone who lives and works in a Houston suburb I have no expertise. The right approach in such cases is to assemble advisors with relevant and varied expertise and help shape a solution for Texas that fairly address stakeholder concerns. I would be open to input as to who might best serve in that capacity. Once the right course of action is developed, relying on the best minds and advice available, policy should move aggressively to implement the solution quickly and effectively. Government has a very important role to play in such emergencies.

Data centers will be essential to national security and economic vitality in this country. But it makes no sense to site them where the demands on infrastructure cannot be met without substantial disruption and cost to local residents and businesses. My shorthand way of saying this is “bring your own water and bring your own power!” Policy must not result in a strain on Texans, from a supply and cost standpoint, to help datacenter operators make more money. I’ll fight hard against that! I also believe that Texas sounds beautiful! I can’t imagine living near a highway for that reason, and I believe Texans have every right to live where it’s quiet and sounds like Texas. Again, I will fight against any policy that ruins our tranquility and the quiet enjoyment of our homes and communities in order to boost corporate profits.

I have been very disappointed with Texas’ tepid response to the looming water crisis. To brag about massive budget surpluses, while watching our state outgrow it’s water infrastructure, is political gross negligence. We need a plan that deals with water rights, supplies, usage, and conservation. And it should be wholistic and actionable. This will be one of the most consequential challenges we face, and it must be faced with very smart people, representing varied points of view, so that our policy is fair, economical, and effective. I can’t think of any problem more pressing and more in need of independent, thoughtful leadership.

Like water, we need to a wholistic approach to energy. We need more and varied sources of supply, we need more methods of meeting power needs without destroying our environment either through over-reliance on high carbon production or long distance transmission. My personal point of view is nuclear power is the ultimate answer and I believe our political leaders can do more to educate citizens as to safety. I also believe we should stimulate investment in innovative techniques (e.g., SMR’s, Fusion).

NIH-funded research has saved a lot of lives and has prevented a lot of human suffering both in the US and worldwide. Policies aimed at efficiency are fine, as long as they don’t slow vital research and the advances being made. The indirect cost cap is an example of an “efficiency” policy that is pure foolishness. The folks who designed it were not intelligent enough to understand what they were doing. Good that the courts will take the time to get this right. We need to get back to intelligent policy making, not the nonsense we’ve seen lately from leaders who want to make headline for themselves, rather than scientific breakthroughs for mankind. I am a big, big believer in government funded research. It benefits everyone!

I was raised in the 1960’s when we praised scientists who pioneered vaccines. We were proud and thankful that we lived in a country where science was eliminating childhood diseases one by one. Lately we have been misled by folks who twist science to support their fantasies about this or that consequence of vaccines. Peer-reviewed research if the only sound basis for health policy, and I will work hard to help people understand the difference between real and junk science. As far as I know, all peer-reviewed research confirms that measles vaccines save lives without any unwanted side effect. I therefore would support policy that gets everyone vaccinated against measles.

As mentioned above, I strongly believe in peer-reviewed research findings as a basis for policy. Its a proven principle, but not everyone knows about it. This is part of a larger problem we must learn how to face in the modern era: lack of critical thinking skills. With information coming at us from every direction, much of it wrong, much of it propagated with malicious intent, we must learn to think for ourselves, to understand fact from nonsense. I believe our public schools must teach critical thinking skills! I can think of few things more important. As a political leader I will embrace that which is confirmed through the scientific method, and I will work hard to help folks understand what that really means and why they should do so as well.

I will not pretend to be an expert on livestock infestation issues. That is why I believe in listening to those who are. We had what seemed to be a perfectly fine system until state and federal budget cuts eviscerated these programs. Let us quit being penny-wise and get these programs reinstituted.

The benefits provided by data centers appear far outweighed by the cost to our local and state communities. The greatest challenge to Texas over the next decade will be allocating water resources. Until these private companies can explain how they will operate without making the water resources problem worse, I would call for a moratorium on their construction.

First and foremost, we must keep the water resource problem from becoming worse. Data centers will only add to our problems. Take these centers out of the mix and the rest of us can probably figure it out.

Data centers should be banned until they can operate without negatively impacting our power grid. Simply put, they should be self-sufficient using clean sources of energy that do not impact the existing grid in a negative way.

The unjustified attack on education and science we have seen over the past few years will only lead to a decline in our society. We must protect scientific integrity and provide funding sources that enable continued excellence in our research infrastructure.

An open discussion without the effort to make this a political issue is a good start.

Good science should always be our guide. When science does not have a clear answer, we need to be aware of the debate and choose carefully. When the science is clear, we should be free to ignore the unsupported outliers.

I would listen to experts from academia, research groups and private business. I would always be aware of the motivations behind those opinions.

Our Texas beef industry is the lifeblood for so many ranching families. I know that efforts are being made to stop the spread of the screwworm. Could we have helped prevent the spread into Texas? I believe that we could have. Our neighbor to the south, Mexico, we could have partnered with them to help control the spread of the screwworm. There is no hard boundary for this pest and economic prevention and partnering goes a long way. We need to pay attention and participate in what is happening around us and with our neighboring countries.

Keywords: Screwworm, Economic partnering with neighboring countries.

PUT THE BRAKES ON! The door was left wide open for data centers, and we must close that door and require data centers to do their due diligence, because they can do better. Economic opportunity, they offer very little. No significant jobs, data centers put an unreasonable drain on our already dated infrastructure; water and electricity. Texas is second in the nation in data centers, and we do not reap tax benefits or job creation. It is big tech creating more for themselves at the expense of Texans.

Keywords: Data Centers, jobs, water, electricity

We must be better stewards of our environment. There is only a finite amount of water. That means controlling the pollutants we are releasing into waterways, using desalinated operations, and making sure that we are using best practices in conservation when it comes to agriculture, industrial, residential, and pleasure uses.

Keywords: Water, conservation

Put data centers on pause. The power grid system has been deficient for years. This issue needs to be addressed immediately. Will it be expensive? Yes!!! and that is why it has not been remedied. Texas has the funds, this would be a long-term project, it would provide local jobs (which data centers do not), it would be reinvesting in Texas. If we want Texas to be the best state in the union and attract jobs and industry, then we have to make a commitment to take care of the power grid.

Keywords: Power grid, jobs

We should be on the cutting edge of research. We want to have the brightest and best doctors, nurses, mental and health facilities. I do not feel that cutting funds is the way to promote vitally important research. We do need to make sure that funds are used wisely.

Keywords: Healthcare

We have years and years of research, data, and facts. I do feel like having proof of vaccines for school registration is a benefit. I also know that some communities do not believe in these vaccines, and for those maybe they sign a medical waiver of some sort. It is a tricky situation, and everyone has the right to refuse or take vaccines. They have proven to be safe and saved lives. Younger generations do not remember children in iron lungs, deaths and the lifelong ailments of polio. It is all about facts and education.

Keywords: Vaccines

Scientific evidence and expert input are invaluable when making decisions. We also have to be flexible when new information comes along and be allowed to make new and better decisions. Public opinion can be difficult to persuade if opinions are out of habit or evidence has not been presented. I think it falls back to education and giving the public all the evidence to make educated decisions.

I would support a strong, science-based biosecurity strategy that protects Texas agriculture while ensuring our farmers and ranchers have the resources they need to respond.

That means strengthening early detection and surveillance, expanding veterinary and laboratory capacity, rapidly containing confirmed cases, and continuing proven tools such as the sterile insect technique that helped eradicate New World screwworm from the United States in the past. I would also support financial and technical assistance for producers affected by necessary quarantine or livestock-movement restrictions.

Most importantly, Texas should be proactive rather than reactive. USDA estimates show that a widespread outbreak could cause billions in economic damage. Investing in prevention, rapid response, and producer education is not only good agricultural policy, it protects rural communities, our food supply, and the Texas economy.

Keywords: My approach would be guided by science, input from farmers and ranchers, and a simple principle: protect Texas agriculture before a manageable threat becomes an economic crisis.

I support responsible data center development because it can bring investment and economic opportunity to Texas. However, growth should not come at the expense of our residents, our water supply, or the reliability of our electrical grid.

I would support requiring large data centers to demonstrate adequate water and energy resources before receiving state incentives, encouraging water-efficient or non-water-intensive cooling technologies, and ensuring these facilities pay their fair share of infrastructure and grid-upgrade costs rather than shifting those expenses onto residential customers. ERCOT already projects data centers to be the largest source of new large-load growth in Texas, which makes planning ahead essential.

I would also tie tax incentives to measurable public benefits, such as permanent jobs, local investment, water conservation, and contributions to grid reliability, and periodically review whether those incentives are actually delivering what taxpayers were promised.

Keywords: Texas should welcome innovation and investment, but economic development must be responsible development. If a project receives public benefits, the public should receive a meaningful benefit in return.

Texas has to stop treating flooding, drought, and water quality as separate problems. We need a comprehensive water strategy built around conservation, infrastructure, and long-term planning.

I would support investing in aging water and wastewater systems, repairing infrastructure that unnecessarily loses water, expanding flood-control and drainage projects, protecting groundwater, and exploring opportunities to capture, store, reuse, and recharge water when heavy rainfall occurs.

I would also support stronger efforts to address pollution in waterways that threaten drinking water, agriculture, and public health.

Agriculture must be a partner in this effort. Farmers and ranchers feed Texas and contribute significantly to our economy. Rather than imposing one-size-fits-all mandates, I would support incentives and technical assistance for more efficient irrigation, soil and water conservation, and other practices that reduce groundwater use while maintaining agricultural productivity.

Keywords: Texas experiences both too much water and not enough. Our goal should be to capture it when we have it, conserve it when we need it, keep it clean, and invest today so future generations aren’t paying for our failure to plan.

Texas needs an electrical grid that is reliable, affordable, and prepared for future growth. I would support investments in transmission infrastructure, additional reliable generation and storage capacity, weatherization, energy efficiency, and technologies that strengthen grid resilience.

We must recognize that residential customers and small businesses should not be expected to subsidize the enormous electricity demands of data centers and other large industrial users.

I support requiring major new loads to demonstrate that the grid can reliably serve them and to pay their fair share of necessary transmission and infrastructure upgrades. Texas cannot continue playing catch-up. Economic growth is important, but reliability must come first.

Keywords: My approach is simple: plan ahead, diversify our energy resources, strengthen the grid, and protect Texas consumers from carrying costs created by massive new industrial demand.

Texas has become a national leader in medical and scientific research, and protecting that infrastructure is both a healthcare priority and an economic priority. NIH funding supports research institutions across Texas, creates jobs, trains future scientists and medical professionals, and contributes to discoveries that can improve and save lives.

At the federal level, I support stable and predictable NIH funding and reimbursement of the legitimate costs required to conduct research safely and effectively. Arbitrary across-the-board funding caps can disrupt long-term research, clinical trials, laboratories, and the workforce supporting them.

At the state level, Texas should be prepared to strengthen partnerships among our universities, medical institutions, and private-sector innovators and strategically protect critical research capacity when federal uncertainty threatens projects important to our state.

Keywords: Research is not simply an expense, it is an investment. Texas should compete to lead the next generation of medical and scientific breakthroughs, not allow short-term funding decisions to undermine decades of progress.

I believe effective public health begins with trust. When parents or community members have concerns about vaccines, government should not dismiss or ridicule them. We should listen, provide transparent information about benefits and potential risks, and ensure families have access to trusted physicians and healthcare professionals who can help them make informed decisions.

At the same time, policymakers have a responsibility to follow credible scientific evidence and protect the broader community, especially infants, medically vulnerable children, seniors, and people with weakened immune systems.

Texas’ 2025 measles outbreak, which resulted in 762 confirmed cases, 99 hospitalizations, and two deaths of unvaccinated school-aged children, demonstrates the consequences infectious diseases can have when community protection declines.

I would support strong disease surveillance, rapid outbreak response, accessible vaccination services, public education led by trusted healthcare professionals, and policies that maintain appropriate protections in schools and other high-risk settings. The evidence shows that two doses of the MMR vaccine are approximately 97% effective at preventing measles. (cdc.gov)

Keywords: My approach would be education over intimidation, transparency over misinformation, and prevention whenever possible. We can respect individual concerns while still taking seriously our responsibility to protect public health.

Scientific evidence and expert input should play an important role in policymaking, particularly when decisions affect public health, agriculture, energy, infrastructure, and the environment. Good policy should be based on the best information available, not political convenience.

When scientific claims compete, I would look at the quality of the research, whether findings have been replicated, the weight of multiple studies, potential conflicts of interest, and the level of agreement among qualified experts. I would also acknowledge uncertainty when it exists. Science evolves as new evidence becomes available, and responsible policymakers should be willing to adjust accordingly.

Public opinion also matters because elected officials represent the people. I believe we have an obligation to listen respectfully and understand why communities have concerns. However, when public opinion and well-established scientific evidence diverge, we should not simply ignore the evidence because it is unpopular.

Keywords: Our responsibility is to explain the facts transparently, listen to legitimate concerns, and make decisions that protect the public interest. I will listen to the people, follow the evidence, ask tough questions, and never allow politics to become a substitute for facts.

I would support an aggressive, science-based response using every proven tool available, including sterile flies, the Screwworm Adult Suppression System (SWASS), surveillance, quarantine, and rapid detection. We have beaten this threat before because science and effective public policy worked together. This outbreak is a reminder of what happens when successful scientific solutions are taken for granted and political decisions override scientific expertise. Texas should strengthen the Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC)’s response capacity, support research and sterile-fly production, and assist affected ranchers. Long term, Texas needs a permanent agricultural biosecurity strategy with funding, trained personnel, veterinary capacity, and rapid-response plans so we are prepared for future threats. The cost of inaction extends beyond ranchers to livestock supplies, food prices, and consumers across Texas.

First, I do not believe taxpayers should subsidize private data centers. As demand for AI and large-scale computing rapidly grows, companies pursuing these massive expansions should be responsible for covering the infrastructure costs associated with them. Data centers should also be required to invest in onsite energy storage or backup systems that reduce strain on the grid during peak demand periods. Residential consumers should not be forced to bear the burden of increased demand through higher costs or rolling blackouts while large corporations continue operating uninterrupted. The same principle applies to water usage. Companies building large data centers should be responsible for securing sustainable water sources rather than relying on taxpayers to finance new infrastructure projects. We have already seen the consequences of industry outpacing public resources in places like Corpus Christi, where water shortages were worsened after major industrial users were promised long-term supply commitments. Taxpayers should not be expected to absorb the costs of projects created to meet private industry demand.

Addressing water loss from aging and failing infrastructure can significantly reduce the need for many costly new water supply projects while delivering faster and more cost-effective results. Too often, large infrastructure projects receive attention because they create a visible legacy for elected officials, even when less glamorous solutions provide greater value. According to the Hidden Reservoirs report, leak detection and repair costs approximately $250 per acre-foot of water saved, compared to an average of $695 per acre-foot for new water supply projects. Even moderate investments in water loss mitigation can deliver substantially more water at a fraction of the cost. Strengthening water systems, improving drought resilience, and preparing for flooding will help protect public health, support economic growth, and ensure that communities have reliable access to water. As senator, I would support policies that prioritize conservation, infrastructure modernization, and preparedness because they provide the greatest return on investment for taxpayers while helping secure Texas’s water future.

Affordable and cleaner energy options are not only better for the environment, but they are also practical, cost-effective, and can be deployed much more quickly than many traditional generation sources. Texas must do more to reduce future electricity demand through energy efficiency. Our current goal of achieving savings equal to just 0.4% of peak demand annually falls well behind national leaders. At a minimum, Texas should be targeting 1–2%, but as the nation’s energy leader, we should strive to set the standard rather than settle for the minimum. We also need to modernize our building standards. New construction in Texas is still being built to energy codes that are more than a decade old. In 2023, the Legislature passed a bipartisan bill to update those standards to the 2021 energy code, but Governor Abbott vetoed it, leaving Texas behind and locking in higher energy costs for homeowners and businesses. These options along with increased investments in storage technologies would help strengthen and stabilize our grid while also lowering costs and helping to meet growing demand.

I would protect Texas’ research infrastructure by increasing stable state research funding, supporting critical labs and facilities, and providing bridge funding when federal research dollars are disrupted. The proposed 15% NIH indirect-cost cap showed how vulnerable our research institutions can be to federal policy changes; indirect costs support the facilities, equipment, and personnel that make research possible. Texas should build on investments like SB 5’s creation and funding of the Dementia Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (DPRIT) and continue investing in biomedical and scientific research. We must also protect our ability to attract global research talent by opposing restrictions on H-1B visas, which are critical to recruiting scientists, doctors, professors, and researchers.

I would engage communities early and directly by holding listening sessions, bringing public-health experts into conversations with residents, and partnering with trusted local healthcare providers and community organizations. People deserve honest answers about infectious diseases, vaccines, their benefits, risks, and what scientists know and don’t know. I believe this is another example of science working too well: vaccines and other public-health measures have been so successful at preventing disease that we can forget how serious these threats once were. When concerns arise, we should respond with transparency and evidence. People have legitimate concerns with our for-profit healthcare system, and these concerns should be addressed. As a state senator, I will listen to communities while relying on qualified experts and the best available science to guide policy.

I believe science and evidence should be central to policymaking, while constituents’ voices and experiences remain essential to the democratic process. Throughout this campaign, I’ve held a series of town halls where I bring in experts on issues ranging from public safety and education to healthcare and energy, then open the floor for questions and discussion with constituents. I always say, “I can’t be an expert in everything, but I can surround myself with experts and make policy decisions based on facts.” As a state senator, I will continue seeking out qualified experts, independent research, and the best available evidence while listening to the people I represent. When public opinion and scientific consensus diverge, I will respect constituents’ concerns, explain what the evidence tells us, and make decisions based on facts rather than political convenience.

Keywords: I always say, “I can’t be an expert in everything, but I can surround myself with experts and make policy decisions based on facts.”

Texas agriculture is critical to our economy, our rural communities, and our food supply, and protecting livestock from invasive pests and disease should be treated as a serious state responsibility.

In response to the current New World screwworm outbreak, I would support strong coordination between the Texas Animal Health Commission, Texas A&M AgriLife, USDA, veterinarians, ranchers, and local officials. That should include increased surveillance and testing, rapid reporting of suspected cases, trained livestock inspectors, appropriate animal-movement safeguards in affected areas, and continued support for proven tools such as sterile-fly releases.

I would also support additional resources to help farmers and ranchers strengthen voluntary on-farm biosecurity, including better access to veterinary services, education on wound inspection and treatment, sanitation practices, and assistance with the costs associated with disease prevention or an outbreak response. Small and family-owned operations should not be financially devastated because they do the responsible thing and report a suspected case.

My approach would be guided by recommendations from veterinarians, agricultural scientists, producers, and agencies such as the Texas Animal Health Commission and USDA, along with evidence about how a disease or pest is actually spreading. Biosecurity measures should be targeted, scientifically justified, regularly reviewed, and no more restrictive than necessary to protect Texas livestock.

The goal should be straightforward: identify threats early, contain them quickly, protect our producers, and prevent a localized outbreak from becoming a statewide agricultural crisis.

I support economic development and technological investment in Texas, but I do not believe Texas families, farmers, ranchers, or small businesses should be asked to subsidize data centers while bearing the costs of the water, electricity, and infrastructure those facilities require.

I would support requiring large data center projects to demonstrate that adequate water and electric capacity exists before receiving state incentives or approval for major utility connections. In water-stressed communities, drinking water, existing residents, agriculture, and locally established businesses should receive priority. I would also encourage the use of reclaimed or recycled water and cooling technologies that reduce freshwater consumption.

On electricity, large data centers should pay their fair share of the generation, transmission, and infrastructure costs created by their demand. Those costs should not simply be shifted to residential ratepayers. Texas should welcome investment, but companies proposing extremely large electrical needs should be expected to contribute toward the infrastructure necessary to serve them and participate in reliability measures when the grid is under stress.

I would also reevaluate Texas’s existing data center tax incentives. Incentives should be tied to measurable public benefits such as permanent Texas jobs, infrastructure investment, responsible water use, and contributions to the communities hosting these facilities. Texas taxpayers should not provide decades of tax advantages simply because a project represents a large capital investment.

My position is informed by Texas’s growing electricity demand, concerns about future water availability, and the relatively small number of permanent jobs some highly automated data centers can create compared with their infrastructure requirements. It is also informed by what I hear from rural Texans who are concerned about protecting their water, property rights, electric bills, and quality of life.

I am not opposed to technology or economic development. I am opposed to putting corporate development ahead of the people who already live and work here. Texas can lead in technology while still requiring responsible growth. My standard would be simple: Texans and their essential resources come first.

Water is one of the most important long-term challenges facing Texas. We need to prepare for both extremes—too little water during drought and too much water during major storms and floods.

I would support sustained state investment in repairing aging and leaking water systems, expanding wastewater reuse and conservation, improving flood-control and drainage infrastructure, protecting water quality, and developing new water supplies where they are economically and environmentally responsible. Small and rural communities must have meaningful access to these investments and not be left behind because they lack the resources of our largest cities.

Agriculture must also be part of the solution, but I do not believe the answer is simply restricting farmers and ranchers who help feed Texas and sustain our rural economies. I would expand voluntary agricultural water-conservation programs that help producers afford more efficient irrigation systems, water measurement technology, soil-management practices, and other improvements that conserve groundwater while keeping agricultural land productive.

I would also prioritize protecting our aquifers and watersheds from contamination and strengthening monitoring and enforcement when pollution threatens drinking water, agriculture, wildlife, or public health.

My approach would be guided by regional water availability, groundwater conditions, population growth, agricultural needs, infrastructure conditions, and sound science. Water policy also has to recognize that Texas is a diverse state, and a solution appropriate for a rapidly growing metropolitan area may not be appropriate for a rural agricultural community.

Finally, as Texas considers major new industrial developments with significant water demands, we should account for those demands before approving incentives or infrastructure commitments. Farmers, ranchers, and existing communities should not be expected to conserve water only to see those savings consumed by new developments without adequate planning.

Texas can protect agriculture while conserving water. I believe the better approach is to give producers the tools and incentives to become even more efficient, invest in the infrastructure our communities need, protect the quality of the water we already have, and make sure future growth does not come at the expense of the Texans who are already here.

I am committed to ensuring that all Texans have access to reliable and affordable electricity. Reliable and affordable electricity is essential to Texas families, businesses, agriculture, and our continued economic growth. I believe Texas needs an all-of-the-above energy strategy that strengthens reliability without unnecessarily increasing costs for consumers.

I would support continued investment in dependable generation, including natural gas and nuclear power, while also expanding wind, solar, battery storage, and other technologies where they can economically strengthen the grid. Texas should not become overly dependent on any single source of electricity. A diverse energy portfolio makes our grid more resilient.

Generation alone is not enough. I would support accelerating necessary transmission improvements, strengthening weatherization and emergency preparedness, and investing in technologies that allow electricity to move more efficiently from where it is generated to where Texans need it.

Finally, I believe grid reliability and affordability must be considered together. Texans should not have to choose between keeping the lights on and being able to afford their electric bill. Any major change to our electricity market should be evaluated based on whether it improves reliability, what it will cost consumers, and whether there is a less expensive way to achieve the same result.

Texas has tremendous energy resources and expertise. With better long-term planning, a diverse generation portfolio, stronger transmission infrastructure, and responsible management of new large electricity users, we can build a grid that is reliable, affordable, and capable of supporting Texas’s future growth.

Texas should view medical and scientific research as both an investment in better health outcomes and an important part of our state’s economy. Our universities, hospitals, and research institutions bring billions of federal research dollars into Texas, support high-skilled jobs, develop new treatments and technologies, and help attract private investment.

At the federal level, I would support maintaining a stable and predictable NIH funding system, including reasonable reimbursement for the facilities and infrastructure necessary to conduct federally funded research. I would oppose arbitrary, across-the-board reductions in indirect-cost reimbursement that do not account for the actual costs of maintaining laboratories, research facilities, regulatory compliance, cybersecurity, specialized equipment, and other infrastructure required to conduct modern medical research. At the same time, I support transparency and accountability so taxpayers can see how both direct and indirect research dollars are being used.

At the state level, Texas should continue investing in research capacity and develop contingency strategies to protect critical research infrastructure when significant changes in federal policy threaten projects of particular importance to Texas. State resources should be targeted strategically rather than simply replacing every lost federal dollar, with priority given to research that has demonstrated scientific merit, economic value, opportunities for additional federal or private investment, and potential benefits for Texans.

I would also support stronger partnerships among universities, hospitals, biotechnology companies, private foundations, and the state so Texas is not unnecessarily dependent on any single source of research funding.

My guiding principle would be protecting Texas’s long-term competitiveness. Once laboratories close, researchers leave, or major projects relocate to another state, rebuilding that capacity can be far more expensive than maintaining it. Texas should insist on accountability for taxpayer dollars while recognizing that medical and scientific research is infrastructure that creates jobs, attracts investment, trains our future workforce, and can ultimately improve and save lives.

I believe public health policy should be based on sound science, transparency, and trust. Parents who have questions about vaccines deserve to be heard and provided clear information from qualified medical professionals, not dismissed or judged.

At the same time, the 2025 measles outbreak demonstrated that infectious diseases can have serious consequences for children and entire communities. I would support maintaining appropriate school vaccination requirements with legitimate medical exemptions, while ensuring policies are guided by credible medical evidence rather than politics.

I would also support expanding access to vaccinations in rural and underserved communities, strengthening outbreak monitoring and response, and providing families with timely, transparent information about vaccine effectiveness and potential risks.

Texans should be encouraged to ask questions and receive trustworthy answers. My responsibility as a policymaker would be to respect those concerns while protecting children, vulnerable Texans, and our communities from preventable disease.

Scientific evidence and expert input should play an important role in policymaking, particularly in areas such as public health, agriculture, water, energy, and environmental protection. Good policy should begin with the best available facts, not a predetermined political outcome.

When scientific claims conflict or remain uncertain, I would seek input from multiple qualified experts, examine the quality and independence of the research, and consider where the weight of credible evidence lies. I also believe policymakers should acknowledge uncertainty rather than presenting evolving science as absolute.

When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, neither should simply be ignored. I would listen to the public and understand the concerns driving their views while clearly communicating what the evidence tells us.

Ultimately, experts should inform policy, but elected officials must make the decisions. My responsibility would be to balance credible scientific evidence with economic impacts, individual rights, practical realities, and the needs of the Texans I represent.

Texas should respond aggressively and scientifically to New World screwworm. I would support strong coordination among Texas animal-health officials, USDA, veterinarians, ranchers, and wildlife experts; expanded surveillance and rapid testing; producer education; and continued sterile-fly programs and other proven control measures.

Biosecurity policy should be based on veterinary science, field data, and the experience of the people who work with livestock every day. Protecting animal health also protects our food supply, rural communities, and agricultural economy.

Keywords: Agricultural biosecurity, Ranchers, Sterile-fly program, Rapid detection, Veterinary science, Food security

Texas can welcome technological investment while requiring large developments to account for their effects on water, electricity, land, taxpayers, and surrounding communities.

I would support transparent reporting of major water and power requirements, meaningful public notice, appropriate safeguards for groundwater and community water supplies, and careful review of tax incentives. Large industrial users should also bear an appropriate share of infrastructure costs attributable to their operations rather than automatically shifting those costs to ordinary ratepayers.

Decisions should be based on measurable resource impacts and long-term infrastructure capacity. Reforming the Rule of Capture is long overdue.

Keywords: Transparency, Water protection, Grid reliability, Ratepayer protection, Local input, Responsible development

Texas needs to treat water infrastructure as essential infrastructure. I would support investment in aging water and wastewater systems, leak reduction, flood mitigation, conservation, groundwater monitoring, reuse, and long-term water-supply projects.

Agriculture must be part of that solution, not treated simply as the problem. Farmers and ranchers feed Texas and support rural economies. Conservation programs should therefore provide incentives and technical assistance that help producers conserve water while keeping agricultural land productive.

Water policy should be guided by science, local conditions, long-term aquifer sustainability, and the basic need to protect reliable water supplies for future generations and again, the Rule of Capture needs to be reformed to today’s needs.

Keywords: Water infrastructure, Conservation, Agriculture, Groundwater, Flood mitigation, Future generations

Grid reliability should come before politics. Texas needs sufficient dependable generation, stronger transmission infrastructure, realistic demand forecasting, weatherization, energy efficiency, and a diverse energy portfolio.

Large new electrical loads should be incorporated into grid planning before they become reliability problems. Texans should not be asked to subsidize infrastructure for exceptionally large power users without transparency about who benefits and who pays.

My standard would be straightforward: reliable electricity, reasonable costs, and planning based on engineering and evidence and transparency.

Keywords: Reliability, Affordability, Transmission, Generation, Demand planning, Evidence-based policy and Transparency

Texas benefits enormously from research conducted at its universities, hospitals, and medical institutions. Research funding supports scientific discovery, medical advances, skilled jobs, laboratories, equipment, and the infrastructure necessary to conduct high-quality research.

I would support protecting Texas research institutions from abrupt funding disruptions while also requiring transparency and accountability for public dollars. At both the state and federal levels, funding decisions should consider the real costs of maintaining the laboratories, facilities, personnel, and administrative systems required for serious research.

Scientific research is not simply an expense. It is an investment in Texas’s health, workforce, universities, and economic future.

Keywords: NIH, Medical research, Texas universities, Innovation, Research infrastructure, Accountability

Public-health policy requires both scientific evidence and public trust. When people have concerns about vaccines, government should provide clear information, listen respectfully, make reliable medical information accessible, and be transparent about both benefits and risks.

During infectious-disease outbreaks, I would rely heavily on physicians, epidemiologists, public-health professionals, and current evidence. I support strong disease surveillance, rapid outbreak response, public education, and access to recommended vaccinations.

People deserve accurate information rather than fear or political rhetoric when making health decisions for themselves and their families.

Keywords: Public trust, Vaccines, Medical evidence, Transparency, Disease prevention, Public health

Scientific evidence should play a major role in policymaking, but elected officials still have the responsibility to weigh that evidence alongside economic consequences, individual rights, community impacts, and practical realities.

When scientific claims conflict, I would ask who conducted the research, whether the results have been independently reproduced or peer reviewed, what evidence supports the conclusions, what uncertainties remain, and whether researchers with different perspectives reach similar conclusions.

Public opinion matters in a democracy, but facts should not change according to polling. When strong scientific evidence and public opinion diverge, government’s responsibility is to communicate the evidence clearly, listen to legitimate concerns, and explain openly why a particular decision is being made.I am a strong believer in science based policies.

Keywords: Evidence, Expert input, Peer review, Transparency, Public input, Facts over politics

I support a comprehensive biosecurity strategy that emphasizes prevention, early detection and rapid response. During the special session, I supported HCR 13, which urged the federal government to take immediate action against New World screwworm, accelerate sterile-fly capacity in Texas and strengthen collaboration with Mexico.

Texas also must do our part. I support strengthening surveillance and trapping in high-risk areas; ensuring the Texas Animal Health Commission has sufficient veterinarians, inspectors and other personnel to investigate suspected cases quickly; improving coordination and information-sharing among agricultural, wildlife, public health and emergency-management agencies; and providing producers, veterinarians, hunters and animal owners with clear guidance regarding prevention, identification, treatment and reporting. When supported by epidemiological evidence, targeted animal-movement safeguards also may be appropriate to contain an infestation while minimizing unnecessary disruptions to producers.

Our policies should be driven by confirmed cases, surveillance and trapping data, animal-movement patterns, veterinary and epidemiological expertise, and the effectiveness of response measures such as sterile-fly releases. We also should examine lessons from the successful eradication of screwworm in the United States in the 1960s and continually adjust our strategy as conditions change. The goal should be to identify infestations as early as possible, contain them quickly and protect our livestock, wildlife, pets, agricultural economy and public health.

I support policies ensuring data center development does not compromise Texans’ access to reliable, affordable water and electricity or require residential ratepayers and taxpayers to subsidize infrastructure for these extremely large industrial users.

Regarding water, I support enhanced reporting of projected and actual water consumption and greater use of conservation measures, reclaimed water and water-efficient technologies, including closed-loop cooling systems when feasible. Texas should have reliable information regarding how much water these facilities will use, where it will come from and how their demands could affect local communities, particularly in areas experiencing drought or stressed groundwater supplies.

Regarding electricity, I support establishing an appropriate rate structure for large-load customers such as data centers so they bear the costs associated with serving their extraordinary electricity demands, including necessary infrastructure improvements, rather than shifting those costs disproportionately to residential and other existing ratepayers. I also support requiring large-load projects to demonstrate that adequate generation and transmission capacity will be available before they are connected to the grid.

Finally, I believe tax incentives should be evaluated carefully and should reflect measurable benefits to Texans, including permanent job creation, economic development and tax revenue, as well as the costs a project imposes on water, electricity and other public infrastructure. Texas should not provide substantial incentives simply to attract projects that consume enormous public resources without demonstrating commensurate long-term benefits to the communities in which they locate.

My position is informed by research and by testimony before the Senate Committee on Business and Commerce, discussions with constituents and stakeholders regarding proposed data centers, and projections regarding the industry’s rapidly increasing electricity and water demands.

Texas must continue making significant, long-term investments in our water infrastructure. Laredoans, for example, know firsthand the consequences of aging infrastructure and the importance of ensuring communities have reliable access to safe water. I support continued state investment in repairing and replacing aging systems, reducing water loss, expanding treatment and reuse capacity, developing new water supplies and helping communities leverage state and federal funding for critical projects.

I also support ensuring that rural and economically disadvantaged communities can access these resources. Funding programs are effective only if communities have the financial and technical capacity to apply for them and meet matching requirements.

Agriculture must be an important part of this strategy. Farmers and ranchers are essential to our economy and food supply, and water policies should promote conservation without jeopardizing their livelihoods. I support expanding grants, low-interest loans and technical assistance for more efficient irrigation systems, metering, canal improvements and other proven conservation technologies that can reduce water use while maintaining agricultural productivity.

My approach would be guided by regional and state water plans, projected population and agricultural needs, drought conditions, infrastructure age and water-loss data, and the measurable water savings achieved by proposed projects. Our goal should be to conserve water and strengthen our infrastructure while ensuring that communities and agricultural producers have the resources they need to prosper.

I have supported strengthening Texas’ electric grid since Winter Storm Uri demonstrated the devastating consequences of an unreliable system. In 2021 I filed legislation requiring mandatory weatherization standards, inspections and meaningful penalties for noncompliance, and I continue to support strong oversight and enforcement to ensure our electric infrastructure can withstand extreme weather.

Going forward, Texas must ensure we have sufficient reliable generation and transmission capacity to meet the needs of our rapidly growing population and economy. I support continued investment in generation, transmission and grid resiliency; rigorous weatherization and emergency-preparedness requirements; improved coordination among ERCOT, the Public Utility Commission, generators and other critical infrastructure providers; and long-term planning that accounts for extreme weather and rapidly increasing electricity demand.

We also must address extraordinarily large new loads, including data centers, without shifting their infrastructure costs to existing residential and business customers. I support appropriate rate structures and interconnection requirements to ensure these customers contribute fairly to the generation and transmission infrastructure necessary to serve them.

Ultimately, reliability and affordability must go hand-in-hand. Our policies should be informed by projected demand, available generation and transmission capacity, extreme-weather risks and their impact on consumers. Texans should be able to depend on the lights staying on during extreme heat or cold without being asked to shoulder an unfair share of the costs associated with unprecedented new demand.

I strongly support protecting and expanding Texas’ research infrastructure because investments in research improve health outcomes, educate and attract talented professionals, create high-quality jobs, strengthen our economy and report great economic multiplier impact and returns on investments.

At the state level, I support continued investment in programs that strengthen our universities’ research capacity and help them leverage federal and private funding. Texas also should expand opportunities for research in historically underserved regions. I have collaborated with the UT Center at Laredo and other institutions to encourage research opportunities in Senate District 21, particularly research that addresses the unique health and community needs of South Texas.

Texas should continue developing the research capacity necessary not only to attract federal dollars, but also to ensure Texans throughout our state benefit from the discoveries, jobs and educational opportunities those investments create.

I have long championed vaccinations and access to preventive health care, including after I passed Senate Bill 66 (1993), the Shots Across Texas immunization initiative that established the goal of immunizing 100 percent of Texas children at the age-appropriate level. I continue to support ensuring that Texans, especially children, have access to recommended vaccinations that protect them and their communities from preventable diseases.

Effective public health policy also requires trust. When persons have questions or concerns about vaccines, we should provide clear, accurate and evidence-based information and encourage conversations with physicians, pediatricians and other trusted health professionals. State and local health officials also must communicate quickly and transparently during outbreaks so families understand the risks, symptoms, preventive measures and available resources.

I support maintaining strong immunization programs, including the Texas Vaccines for Children program, strengthening public education and outreach, ensuring vaccines remain accessible and affordable, and providing public health agencies the resources necessary for surveillance, rapid testing, contact tracing and outbreak response. These efforts are especially important in rural and underserved communities in which access to health care may be limited.

Our policies should be guided by credible scientific evidence and the recommendations of qualified medical and public health professionals, with the goal of protecting individual patients while preventing avoidable illness and death throughout our communities.

Scientific evidence and expert input play an important role in my policymaking process. As legislators, we routinely hear from experts in their respective fields to understand complex issues, evaluate potential consequences and identify the policies most likely to achieve the best outcomes. I also believe strongly in hearing from supporters and opponents of proposals, affected stakeholders and the Texans whom our decisions will impact.

When scientific claims compete or evidence is uncertain, I consider the quality and breadth of the available research, the qualifications and experience of experts, whether findings have been independently replicated or corroborated, the degree of scientific consensus and areas in which legitimate uncertainty remains. We also should continue evaluating new information as it becomes available and be willing to adjust policies when the evidence warrants doing so.

Public opinion is an important part of representative government, and concerns expressed by constituents should never be dismissed simply because they differ from prevailing scientific conclusions. Instead, policymakers and experts should listen to those concerns, explain the evidence clearly and transparently, and work to build public understanding and trust.

Ultimately, however, especially when decisions involve public health, safety or the responsible stewardship of our natural resources, policy should be grounded in the best available evidence. My responsibility is to consider the science, expert testimony, public input and practical consequences carefully and make the most informed decision possible for all Texans, especially those whom I represent.

I have only recently heard about this screwworm and honestly know nothing about it. I would need to defer to industry experts on how to mitigate this outbreak and prevent it from recurring.

I have recently gone down this rabbit hole to educate myself on the subject of data centers. I believe they are here to stay, however, they must pay their own way. This means no tax incentives or abatements and they must find ways to secure their own energy and water. We should create a commission of residents and the owners/operators of the data centers to make sure everyone is happy and working together.

Just off the top of my head, the state should consider alternative means for collecting all of the rain water. This could include the building of more lakes and / or other collection methods.

2021 was an awakening to the issues with the power grid. I don’t however have any answers to how we solve them.

Big pharma makes millions on the drugs they produce, but they don’t pass along savings to us. I don’t believe we should be subsidizing pharmaceutical or any scientific research unless the savings are passed along to the public.

While I’m not an anti-vaxer (my kids had all of their vaccines growing up), I have come to learn a great deal about them. This is all due to the CV19 vax being perpetrated upon us. If I had known then what I know now, I probably would be an anti-vaxer. I think certain vaccines are safe, but they’ve been around forever. I also think there is something to be said for building a natural immunity to diseases. The number of vaccines recommended for children has risen exponentially as well. We need to make sure parents are educated about the risks and benefits of vaccines so that they can make the decision on whether or not to vaccinate their children and not just rely on the word of their doctors.

The legislature is made up of a multitude of people with different backgrounds. We have lawyers, doctors, business people, educators, and others each bringing their own expertise. We also have or should have committees of industry experts guiding us in the decision making process.

I would strongly support expanding the sterile insect technique, which helped eradicate screwworm from the United States previously and remains the primary proven control strategy. USDA is already expanding sterile-fly capacity, including a Texas production facility planned to produce as many as 300 million sterile flies per week and an operational Texas dispersal facility capable of releasing up to 100 million per week. Texas should also maintain surveillance at the border, ports, livestock facilities, and other high-risk locations; TDA currently uses trapping and weekly monitoring in these areas to provide early detection.

I would also support financial assistance for producers who suffer documented losses because of government-ordered quarantine, treatment, or livestock destruction, along with expanded education and veterinary assistance so producers can identify and report infections quickly. Any new drug or pesticide treatment should be approved based on demonstrated safety and effectiveness rather than political pressure.

My approach would be guided by veterinarians, livestock producers, Texas A&M AgriLife researchers, the Texas Animal Health Commission, USDA APHIS, and the experience of the successful earlier eradication program. The economic case for prevention is compelling: Texas agricultural officials cite USDA estimates that a major outbreak could cost cattle producers approximately $732 million and reduce Texas economic activity by about $1.8 billion. The most responsible policy is therefore to invest heavily in early detection and eradication before screwworm becomes permanently established in Texas.

Keywords: sterile insect technique, trapping and weekly monitoring, financial assistance for those who experience loss, returning surveillance methods cut by the Trump administration

I do not support continued expansion of large-scale data centers in Texas under our current policies. These facilities can consume enormous amounts of electricity and water while receiving substantial tax advantages, and I do not believe Texas families, farmers, ranchers, and small businesses should bear those costs so some of the world’s wealthiest corporations can build increasingly resource-intensive facilities here.

I would support a statewide pause on new tax incentives for large data centers and a comprehensive review of the exemptions already available to the industry. Texas should not subsidize an industry simply because it promises large capital investments when those investments may also require Texans to finance additional generation, transmission, water, and other infrastructure.

I would also require data centers to pay the full infrastructure costs attributable to their enormous electrical demand and prohibit those costs from being shifted to residential and small-business ratepayers. ERCOT’s forecasts demonstrate the scale of the problem. Its 2025 forecast increased projected data-center demand for 2030 from 29,614 megawatts to 77,965 megawatts in only one year. That extraordinary growth should cause us to ask whether continually expanding electricity supply to accommodate data centers is in the best interest of existing Texans.

Water is equally important, particularly in rural Texas. I would require full public disclosure of proposed water consumption before a project is approved and would protect agricultural, municipal, and residential water needs ahead of data-center cooling demands. I would also support giving counties greater authority to regulate the location and resource impacts of large industrial developments, including data centers. Rural Texans should have a meaningful voice before a project capable of dramatically changing local water and electricity demand is placed in their community.

Texas does not have to accept unlimited data-center development simply because companies want to build here. Our water, electric grid, agricultural land, and communities are resources we have an obligation to protect. Until Texas can demonstrate that additional data centers will not threaten water supplies, increase utility costs for existing customers, undermine grid reliability, or leave taxpayers responsible for their infrastructure needs, I would oppose additional large-scale data-center development and the tax incentives being used to attract it.

Keywords: use of water, zoning power for counties, stop large-scale data-center development, “They profit; we pay” has to stop, no tax incentives for millionaires

Texas needs a water policy that recognizes two realities at once: we must prepare for both devastating floods and increasingly serious water shortages. I would support major investment in repairing aging water systems, reducing leaks, improving drainage and flood-control infrastructure, expanding wastewater reuse, and developing conservation projects that extend our existing water supplies. The Texas Water Development Board has identified conservation as an important part of meeting future demand, and the state’s first comprehensive flood plan also demonstrates the enormous need for coordinated investment in flood protection.

Agriculture must be prioritized along with household use of water. Irrigation accounted for approximately 53% of Texas water demand in 2020, but the Texas Water Development Board projects agricultural irrigation demand will decline as irrigation becomes more efficient. I would support voluntary conservation programs, grants and low-interest financing that help farmers and irrigation districts replace aging equipment, line or repair leaking canals, adopt more efficient irrigation technology, and conserve groundwater while keeping farms economically viable.

At the same time, Texas must establish clearer priorities for scarce water. Household drinking water, existing communities, agriculture, livestock, and the long-term sustainability of our aquifers should take precedence over new, extremely water-intensive industrial developments. I would oppose allowing projects such as large data centers to consume enormous quantities of groundwater in areas already facing depletion or drought while farmers and rural residents are being asked to conserve.

Keywords: opposing data center use of water, prioritizing use, excluding use by data centers from our decreasing Texas sources; water for people and farms/ranches, no Texas water for data centers

Texas must make the reliability and affordability of electricity for existing residents and businesses its first priority. I would support continued investment in weatherizing power plants and natural-gas infrastructure, strengthening transmission, expanding energy storage and distributed generation, and improving conservation and demand-response programs that reduce strain during extreme heat and winter weather.

I am particularly concerned about the rapidly increasing electricity demands of data centers. Texas should not build an increasingly expensive electric system around the needs of an industry whose facilities can consume as much electricity as entire communities while creating relatively few permanent jobs. I would oppose additional large-scale data center development until Texas can demonstrate that it will not jeopardize grid reliability or increase electricity costs for existing consumers.

I would also require extremely large electricity users to pay the full costs of the generation, transmission, interconnection, and other infrastructure needed to serve them. Residential customers, farmers, and small businesses should not see higher electric bills because the grid must be expanded to accommodate new industrial loads. Nor should taxpayers subsidize those facilities through tax incentives while simultaneously paying for the infrastructure necessary to power them.

Texas also needs a diverse and resilient energy portfolio. I support using our abundant natural gas resources while continuing to expand wind, solar, battery storage, and other technologies when they improve reliability and lower costs without interfering with our farm and ranch land. Texas should not allow energy policy to become an ideological contest between fossil fuels and renewables; the standard should be whether a resource can provide Texans with reliable and affordable electricity when they need it.

Finally, I would demand greater transparency from ERCOT and state regulators regarding proposed large-load connections and their expected effects on electricity demand, transmission needs, reliability, and consumer prices. Texans should know how much electricity these projects will require and who will pay for the infrastructure needed to serve them before commitments are made. Again, I think counties should have zoning authority in their unincorporated areas similar to those of cities.

The Texas grid exists first and foremost to serve the people of Texas. We should strengthen it for our homes, farms, hospitals, schools, and existing businesses—not continually increase its burden to accommodate an unlimited number of massive new electricity consumers. And, NEVER, should Texans pay extra to support multi-billion-dollar data-center projects.

Keywords: Texans first, transparency, stop “They profit; we pay” approaches regarding data center development, no free rides for data centers

I would support protecting the long-term stability of Texas’s research universities, medical centers, and hospitals by opposing arbitrary federal limits on reimbursement for legitimate research costs. Federal research grants do not pay only for a scientist and a laboratory experiment. They also depend on laboratories, utilities, information technology, regulatory compliance, grant administration, equipment maintenance, security, and other infrastructure that makes the research possible.

For that reason, I would oppose replacing independently negotiated indirect-cost rates with a one-size-fits-all 15% cap. NIH announced such a policy in February 2025, even though institutions have historically negotiated these rates based on documented costs. Research examining the proposal concluded that the cap could leave universities billions of dollars short nationwide and threaten the sustainability of research programs.

I would hope our federal-level representatives would support stable, predictable NIH funding and a transparent process for determining reasonable facilities and administrative costs.

But, Texas should also prepare for uncertainty in federal research funding. I would support targeted state matching funds, research infrastructure grants, and public-private partnerships that help Texas institutions compete for federal grants and preserve strategically important research programs. However, I would not support asking Texas taxpayers simply to replace every dollar withdrawn by the federal government. State investments should be targeted toward research with clear benefits for Texans, including medicine, agriculture, water, energy, public health, and technologies that strengthen the state’s economy.

This is also an economic-development issue. Research funding supports scientists, physicians, technicians, students, laboratories, hospitals, suppliers, and businesses while helping Texas attract highly skilled workers and develop new treatments and technologies. Allowing established research infrastructure to deteriorate can be far more expensive than maintaining it because laboratories, research teams, and specialized expertise are difficult to rebuild once they are lost.

Keywords: cheaper to invest in research, matching funds, prioritize research benefitting Texans

I believe vaccines are one of the most effective public-health tools we have, and Texas policy should be guided by sound medical evidence. The 2025 measles outbreak demonstrated what can happen when vaccination rates fall. Texas reported 762 cases, 99 hospitalizations, and two deaths among unvaccinated school-age children.

I would support making recommended childhood vaccines readily available and affordable throughout Texas, particularly in rural communities where access to pediatricians and healthcare facilities may be limited. I would also support adequately funding local public-health departments, disease surveillance, rapid outbreak response, and public education so Texas can identify and contain infectious diseases before they spread.

I would oppose efforts to weaken evidence-based vaccination requirements for children attending public schools. Vaccination is not solely an individual matter when a highly contagious disease can spread through a classroom and endanger infants, medically vulnerable children, pregnant women, and people who cannot safely receive certain vaccines.

Texans should be able to expect their government to distinguish between legitimate scientific debate and claims that have been repeatedly disproven. Public-health decisions should be based on evidence from qualified medical researchers, physicians, epidemiologists, and established scientific institutions—not political ideology.

Keywords: science, not political ideology; only listen to medical experts, it’s not just about you

Scientific evidence should play a central role in policymaking, particularly when decisions affect public health, water, agriculture, energy, and the environment. Elected officials should seek the advice of qualified scientists, physicians, engineers, farmers, economists, and other professionals who understand the issues affected by our decisions. Good policymaking begins with listening to people who know more about a subject than we do.

At the same time, expert advice should inform democratic decision-making rather than replace it. Policymakers must consider scientific evidence alongside economic consequences, individual rights, costs, feasibility, and the experiences of the people affected by a policy.

When scientific claims conflict, I would look at the quality and quantity of the evidence rather than simply counting voices on each side. I would consider whether findings have been independently replicated, whether research has undergone credible peer review, whether multiple studies reach similar conclusions, whether researchers have disclosed potential conflicts of interest, and whether respected scientific and professional organizations have reached a consensus based on the available evidence. I would also distinguish legitimate scientific uncertainty from misinformation or isolated claims unsupported by the larger body of research. As a Ph.D. student currently completing my own research dissertation, I feel especially qualified to distinguish between valid research and anomalies or opinion.

Scientific uncertainty should not become an excuse for doing nothing when the potential consequences are serious. Sometimes policymakers must act before every question has been answered. In those situations, I would favor reasonable precautions based on the best evidence available, monitor the results, and be willing to change course as new evidence emerges.

When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, government should listen carefully to the public and understand the reasons for that disagreement. But public opinion cannot determine whether a vaccine prevents disease, whether an aquifer is being depleted, whether a pollutant causes harm, or how much electricity the grid can reliably provide. Those are questions of evidence. Our responsibility as elected officials is not to tell people that their concerns do not matter, but to explain the evidence honestly, make the decision-making process transparent, and earn public trust.

Keywords: best information, expert information, understanding opinions, ability to explain, transparent decision-making

Texas agriculture is too important to our economy and food supply to wait until an outbreak becomes a crisis. I support a coordinated state and federal response that prioritizes rapid detection, livestock surveillance, veterinary capacity, movement controls when scientifically justified, and proven eradication tools such as sterile insect release.

We should also invest in long-term biosecurity: stronger monitoring at high-risk entry points, better communication with ranchers and veterinarians, and emergency resources that can be deployed quickly without leaving individual producers to shoulder the cost of protecting the broader agricultural economy.

My decisions would be guided by USDA and Texas animal-health data, veterinary and entomological expertise, economic impact assessments, and the effectiveness of previous eradication efforts. Good agricultural policy should protect both producers and consumers while responding proportionately to the actual risk.

Keywords: Protect Texas agriculture; rapid detection; biosecurity; science-based response; support Texas ranchers; prevention costs less than crisis

Texas should welcome innovation and economic development, but growth has to pay its own way. Data centers can consume enormous amounts of electricity and water, and families and existing businesses should not be forced to subsidize the infrastructure required to serve exceptionally large new industrial loads.

I support requiring large-load developments to provide transparent projections of their electricity and water needs, demonstrate adequate infrastructure capacity, and bear an appropriate share of grid and transmission upgrades attributable to their projects. During periods of scarcity, residential customers and essential services must be protected.

Tax incentives should also be tied to measurable public benefits — including permanent Texas jobs, infrastructure investment, and community impact — rather than awarded simply because a project is large.

Texas can lead in technology without writing blank checks to some of the world’s largest corporations. Economic development should make communities stronger, not make residents’ electric and water bills higher.

Keywords: Growth should pay its own way; protect ratepayers; data-center accountability; grid capacity; water conservation; responsible economic development

Texas cannot continue treating flooding, drought, water quality, and infrastructure as separate problems. They are parts of the same long-term water challenge.

I support major investment in repairing aging and leaking water systems, expanding water reuse and conservation, improving stormwater and flood-control infrastructure, protecting groundwater supplies, and strengthening water-quality monitoring. Rapidly growing communities need infrastructure investment to keep pace with population growth rather than continually playing catch-up.

Agriculture must be a partner in this effort, not treated as the enemy. Farmers and ranchers feed Texas and support a major part of our economy. I would favor incentives and technical assistance for efficient irrigation, drought-resistant practices, conservation technology, and voluntary water-saving measures that reduce consumption without threatening agricultural livelihoods.

Our goal should be to preserve Texas water for future generations while protecting the people and industries that depend on it today.

Keywords: Texas water security; fix aging infrastructure; conservation; flood resilience; protect groundwater; partner with farmers

Grid reliability is fundamental infrastructure. Texans should not have to wonder whether the electricity will stay on during the hottest or coldest days of the year.

I support an all-of-the-above reliability strategy: additional generation, energy storage, stronger transmission infrastructure, weatherization, demand-response programs, and faster deployment of resources that can improve reliability. Texas should evaluate energy sources based on reliability, cost, scalability, and their ability to strengthen the grid rather than political ideology.

We also have to plan for extraordinary new demand from data centers and other large industrial users. Large loads should be connected where and when the grid can reliably accommodate them, and the cost of infrastructure needed primarily to serve those projects should not simply be shifted onto families and small businesses.

Texas is an energy state. We have the technology and expertise to build one of the strongest grids in the country. We need the planning and accountability to match it.

Keywords: Reliable Texas grid; all-of-the-above energy; protect ratepayers; storage and transmission; weatherization; large-load accountability

Texas should be competing to attract researchers, physicians, scientists, biotechnology companies, and federal research dollars — not creating conditions that drive them elsewhere.

I support protecting stable, competitive research funding for Texas universities and medical institutions. Indirect research costs are not meaningless administrative expenses; they help support laboratories, equipment, cybersecurity, regulatory compliance, facilities, and other infrastructure necessary for research to occur.

Changes to federal reimbursement should be based on transparent evidence about actual research costs rather than an arbitrary one-size-fits-all percentage. At the state level, Texas should also maintain strong research institutions and consider strategic investments when federal changes threaten research capacity that is particularly important to our economy or public health.

Research funding creates jobs, trains our future workforce, produces medical breakthroughs, and attracts private investment. Protecting Texas’s research infrastructure is an economic-development strategy as much as a scientific one.

Keywords: Protect Texas research; medical innovation; Texas jobs; research infrastructure; competitive universities; evidence-based funding

Public health works best when people trust the information they receive. When parents or community members have questions about vaccines, government should not dismiss them. We should listen, answer questions transparently, acknowledge uncertainty when it exists, and make credible medical information easy to access.

At the same time, policymakers have a responsibility to take infectious disease seriously. The 2025 Texas measles outbreak resulted in hundreds of infections, hospitalizations, and the deaths of two children. Decisions involving outbreaks should therefore be informed by epidemiologists, pediatricians, infectious-disease specialists, local health professionals, and the best available scientific evidence.

I support strong disease surveillance, rapid outbreak response, access to vaccination, public education, and transparent reporting of both benefits and risks.

People deserve both respect and accurate information. We need to do both build trust and protect public health.

Keywords: Trust through transparency; evidence-based public health; protect children; informed communities; disease prevention; access to vaccination

Scientific evidence should play a major role in policymaking because good government requires understanding the likely consequences of our decisions.

That does not mean treating every scientific claim as equally credible. I would look at the quality and reproducibility of the research, the strength of the underlying data, peer review, relevant professional expertise, conflicts of interest, and whether findings are supported by multiple independent sources.

When credible experts disagree, policymakers should understand why. Sometimes disagreement reflects legitimate uncertainty, and policy should acknowledge that uncertainty rather than pretending it does not exist. We should continue evaluating new evidence and adjust policies when the facts change.

Public opinion also matters in a representative democracy, particularly when deciding how policies are implemented. But public opinion cannot change physical or biological facts. When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, my responsibility is to listen to constituents, communicate the evidence clearly, weigh consequences and individual rights, and make the decision I believe best protects the people I represent.

Good policy should be evidence-based, transparent, accountable, and willing to change when better evidence emerges.

Keywords: Evidence over ideology; follow the data; transparency; independent expertise; acknowledge uncertainty; listen to constituents; accountable policymaking

I was glad to see Texas State Parks educating campers and visitors about the risks of NWS infections at Lake Corpus Christi State Park this summer. I am hoping that ranchers and farmers are aware of the outbreak and how to stop the spread, and also hopeful that the USDA is doing their part. In Texas, we should be making detection and prevention priorities while also educating the public and stakeholders about the risks and ways to avoid infection. Cases, according to the USDA, have been declining since NWS were detected, but we could have prevented their presence in the first place by following the science that had already been used in the past. We have to make sure lawmakers and decisionmakers are aware of the science already out there and used in the past.

Keywords: Detection, prevention, educating

Water and energy use from these data centers cannot be in direct competition with surrounding communities. According to NOAA, many parts of our state are in a long-term drought status. Corpus Christi was struggling with industry using their fresh water reservoirs almost to having nothing left (luckily, recent rains have brought the levels in the reservoirs up significantly!). Local residents should come first when resources they are dependent on, like water and electricity, are at stake. While data centers could bring jobs, I believe most of them are up front in the building of such facilities and then later in maintenance—not in huge numbers that support an entire town. We need to have laws that outline resource use and planning, noise reduction plans, land use regulations, and then have prospective centers outline the specific ways they believe they will give back to their neighbors and our state as a whole. We also have to make sure that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is ready to monitor these facilities and keep them in compliance.

Keywords: Communities, reservoirs, give back to their neighbors, TCEQ

A program that supports private homeowners in protecting their local waterways would include rain water collection information, education, and resources. Businesses with certain square footages of buildings should have to make rain water collection and mitigation (like rain gardens and investing in permeable surfaces for outdoor walkways) part of their building or renovation plans. We should strengthen our testing at municipal wastewater facilities and tighten some of the quality parameters of the wastewater before it enters our local watersheds, especially in areas where it will eventually enter drinking water reservoirs, like in Houston/The Woodlands/Conroe where we are moving towards using only surface water for drinking water as our area sinks from groundwater depletion.

Keywords: Rain water collection, mitigation, drinking water

Our Texas power grid has to be modernized and, especially in areas prone to hurricanes, local lines moved underground if possible. While this will cost money, as all of these investments will, we can do it over a period of time and prioritize area-by-area. We already have loads of wind and solar power in our state, but it has to be moved from the less-populated west to more populated areas. We should invest in our populated areas with solar cells on tall buildings where possible, and more efficient batteries available across the state. Some of our natural gas lines have been insulated now after Winter Storm Uri, but many of our power plants aren’t fully protected and a loophole that allows facilities to request an exemption from weatherization requirements should be rescinded. We have to make sure our Railroad Commission is checking in on our power plants, that they are winterized and working properly, to the standards in place. We absolutely cannot put all of these costs on consumers either. Electricity is an absolute necessity, as the hundreds of deaths during Uri showed, and it shouldn’t be a burden for the people of Texas to afford.

Keywords: Modernized, invest, solar cells, Winter Storm Uri, loophole, winterized, Railroad Commission, necessity, burden

The federal government needs to step back in and fill this space like they have in the past! But if they refuse, or if this court case doesn’t go the way it should, I would hope the state would be able to jump in and provide some support. We do have billions of dollars in our Rainy Day Fund, and it would take a two-thirds vote to use it in this capacity, but I would certainly see that as an excellent investment. This type of research helps find cures for diseases that cost Texans billions of dollars each year. With so many large, world-renowned healthcare centers in our state, we have to support the research going on in them. It will also save Texans money in the long-term, while also saving lives.

Keywords: Rainy Day Fund, excellent investment, cures for diseases, world-renowned healthcare centers

We must educate based on the scientific facts: vaccines prevent diseases that are painful, costly, and sometimes deadly, and vaccines are safe and effective. We don’t usually see cases of these vaccine-preventable illnesses BECAUSE of our vaccination rate, not in spite of it! We can educate on what these diseases look like in children and adults who aren’t vaccinated so that people are aware of the risks: because we had many vaccines as my generation was growing up, many people making decisions for their kids today never saw someone with Polio or the Measles, and many don’t know the risks of being infected versus the extremely small risks from vaccines for most people. Doctors’ offices are currently required to have all kinds paperwork and show images for different things; the risk of vaccine preventable diseases should be common among them.

Keywords: Vaccines are safe and effective, Polio, the Measles, extremely small risks

Scientific consensus has to be number one. And not from a small group outside of the larger scientific community. There are scientific organizations for every field that we can look to as lawmakers when we’re trying to make policy decisions that can help guide our research into specific topics. I would also look to scientific journals where peer-reviewed work can be read and evaluated. Science plays an important role in so much of our day-to-day lives, whether it’s the engineering it took to build a bridge we cross every day, or the biochemistry involved in the medicines we take, or the environmental science that studies the impact of a changing climate on our natural resources and wildlife alike; it has to be considered when we’re writing the laws that will govern our everyday lives as well.

Keywords: Scientific organizations, scientific journals, peer-reviewed work, engineering, biochemistry, environmental science

I would support a strong, science-based response that gives Texas the tools to contain the New World screwworm outbreak quickly while protecting our livestock, food supply, and economy. That includes increased funding for surveillance and testing, rapid reporting of suspected cases, coordinated response teams, appropriate livestock movement controls in affected areas, and expanded access to proven tools such as sterile fly releases. USDA and Texas officials are already using surveillance, trapping, and coordinated federal and state response efforts, and those efforts should have the resources necessary to respond quickly as conditions change.

I would also support stronger education and assistance for ranchers, veterinarians, and livestock owners so they can recognize infections early, properly care for wounds, and report suspected cases immediately. Texas A&M AgriLife emphasizes that early detection, regular animal inspection, wound care, and proactive livestock management are important parts of reducing the risk of infestation.

As a legislator, I would look to guidance from USDA APHIS, the Texas Animal Health Commission, Texas A&M AgriLife, veterinarians, agricultural producers, and other qualified experts when determining the appropriate response. Even in a district like House District 149, protecting Texas agriculture matters because disruptions to livestock production can affect food costs, jobs, and families across our state. Good policy should be driven by reliable evidence, early action, accountability, and cooperation between state, federal, and local partners.

Keywords: “Protecting Texas agriculture means protecting Texas families, jobs, and our economy.”, “Ranchers and veterinarians need the tools and information to respond quickly.”, “Good policy starts with reliable information and people who understand what is happening on the ground.”, “When state, local, and federal partners work together, Texas is better prepared.”, “We should always be proactive when our food supply and economy are at risk.”

I support responsible data center development that brings jobs and investment to Texas without shifting unnecessary costs onto families and small businesses. Texas should welcome innovation, but growth must be planned around the capacity of our electric grid, water supply, and local infrastructure. ERCOT’s forecasts show how quickly large electricity demand is growing, which makes long-term planning and grid reliability even more important.

I would support requiring large data center projects to provide clear information about their projected energy and water needs before receiving major state incentives. Texas already provides sales tax exemptions for qualifying data centers, including exemptions on certain equipment and electricity. I believe incentives should be tied to measurable benefits such as job creation, infrastructure investment, responsible water use, and efforts to reduce strain on the electric grid.

I also believe residential customers and small businesses should not be expected to carry an unfair share of infrastructure costs created by extremely large new energy users. Data centers that require significant new transmission, generation, or other infrastructure should contribute fairly toward those costs.

Water must also be part of the conversation. Texas already collects and analyzes water use information for statewide planning, and that same evidence-based approach should guide decisions about large developments that may place additional pressure on local water supplies.

My approach would be simple. Texas can support economic growth and new technology while still protecting our water, maintaining a reliable electric grid, and keeping utility costs affordable for working families.

Keywords: Data centers, grid reliability, water conservation, utility affordability, responsible growth, infrastructure investment, tax incentives, energy demand, working families, economic development

Texas needs a long-term water strategy that addresses flooding, drought, aging infrastructure, and water quality at the same time. I would support investments to repair and modernize water systems, improve drainage and flood control, reduce water loss from aging pipes, expand conservation and reuse programs, and strengthen efforts to keep pollutants out of our waterways.

I also believe communities should have reliable information about the quality of the water they drink and use. When contamination is identified, state and local governments should have the resources to respond quickly and protect public health.

Agriculture must be a partner in this work. Farmers and ranchers are essential to the Texas economy, and conservation policies should recognize the realities they face. I would support voluntary conservation programs, incentives for more efficient irrigation, improved water management technology, and partnerships that help producers conserve water without threatening their ability to remain productive.

My approach would be guided by science, local water conditions, long-term population growth, and the economic impact on families, farmers, and communities. We should protect our water supply while making sure the people who grow our food are part of the solution.

Keywords: Water infrastructure, flood control, drought preparedness, water quality, conservation, agriculture, efficient irrigation, groundwater protection, aging infrastructure, long term water planning

I support a balanced approach that strengthens the Texas power grid, keeps utility costs affordable, and prepares our state for continued population and economic growth. Grid reliability is not optional. Families and businesses need to know that when temperatures rise or demand increases, the power will stay on.

I would support continued investment in transmission infrastructure, additional reliable generation capacity, energy efficiency, and a diverse mix of energy sources. Texas should use every responsible resource available to strengthen the grid and reduce the risk of outages.

I also believe large energy users, including data centers and other major industrial developments, should contribute fairly toward infrastructure costs created by their demand. Those costs should not simply be passed along to residential customers and small businesses.

My approach would be guided by ERCOT demand forecasts, reliability data, consumer costs, population growth, and input from communities and energy experts. Texas can continue growing, but we must make sure our infrastructure grows with it and that working families are not left paying the price.

Keywords: Grid reliability, affordable energy, transmission infrastructure, reliable generation, energy efficiency, consumer protection, data center demand, infrastructure investment, population growth, working families

Texas should protect the research institutions that are driving medical breakthroughs, creating jobs, and training the next generation of scientists and health professionals. I support stable federal research funding and believe decisions about research costs should be based on evidence and the actual cost of maintaining laboratories, equipment, technology, safety systems, and the staff necessary to support quality research.

I would oppose arbitrary funding changes that could destabilize universities, hospitals, and research institutions that have already planned their work around negotiated agreements. NIH proposed replacing negotiated indirect cost rates with a standard 15 percent rate in 2025, but a federal appeals court affirmed the permanent injunction blocking that policy in January 2026.

At the state level, I would support strengthening Texas research investments and exploring temporary support when sudden federal funding changes threaten important research projects or jobs. We should also make sure smaller institutions, including historically underfunded universities, have a fair opportunity to compete for research dollars.

Texas has some of the best universities, hospitals, researchers, and medical professionals in the country. Protecting that research infrastructure is an investment in our economy, our workforce, and most importantly, the health and future of Texas families.

Keywords: NIH funding, medical research, research infrastructure, Texas universities, hospitals, scientific innovation, job creation, stable funding, research equity, public health

I believe public health works best when people trust the information they are receiving. When parents and community members have questions about vaccines or infectious diseases, we should listen to their concerns, provide clear information, and make sure they can speak with doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and other trusted health professionals. The CDC has emphasized working with trusted community voices and using culturally appropriate outreach during measles outbreaks.

Texas experienced 762 confirmed cases during the 2025 measles outbreak, along with 99 hospitalizations and the deaths of two school-aged children. That experience shows why prevention and early response matter.

I would support evidence-based vaccination policies, stronger public health education, better access to vaccines and preventive care, and adequate resources for schools and local health departments to respond when outbreaks occur. Texas should also make sure families receive accurate and understandable information about vaccine benefits, risks, and existing requirements.

My goal is not to dismiss people who have questions. It is to make sure those questions are answered with facts and compassion. Protecting children and vulnerable members of our communities requires trust, access to care, and public health decisions that are guided by the best available science.

Keywords: Public health, vaccine safety, community trust, accurate information, preventive care, measles prevention, child health, local health departments, evidence based policy, access to care

Scientific evidence and expert input should play an important role in policymaking because elected officials have a responsibility to understand the likely consequences of the decisions we make. On issues such as public health, energy, agriculture, education, and the environment, I would seek input from qualified experts, review credible research, and also listen to the people and communities who will be directly affected.

When scientific claims are competing or uncertain, I would look at the quality of the evidence, whether findings have been independently reviewed or repeated, the qualifications of the experts involved, and whether there is a broader body of research supporting a conclusion. I also believe policymakers should be transparent when the evidence is still developing and be willing to revisit policies as better information becomes available.

Public opinion matters because government serves the people, but public policy should not ignore established evidence simply because an issue is unpopular or misunderstood. When scientific consensus and public opinion differ, I believe the responsibility of a policymaker is to listen, explain the evidence clearly, address legitimate concerns, and make decisions that protect the long term well being of the public.

Keywords: Scientific evidence, expert input, credible research, public trust, transparency, evidence based policy, community input, scientific consensus, responsible leadership, informed decision making

This isn’t really in my wheelhouse, but: We need to isolate and/or quarantine animals to keep it from spreading. We need to ensure CDC, NIH and similar Texas agencies are fully funded to conduct surveillance and testing.

Keywords: Quarantine, surveillance, testing

Public officials must not sign NDAs at any part of the timeline. Data centers must pay for all of their water and energy usage, and probably pay a premium to prevent overuse (which will happen). The corporations must contribute financially to adding new water and energy resources. Noise and light strict regulation is needed to prevent harmful effects on people, animals and the environment. The Texas Commission of Environmental Quality and EPA must also heavily regulate and monitor potential harm caused by chemicals, noise and light. During construction, developers must pay for road usage and harm, as well as other infrastructure. Landlords may not evict residents in favor of construction workers without a financial buyout of the renter, at their option, so that they can find suitable housing and moving expenses. Texas must immediately stop tax abatements to data centers and similar corporations. Again, I’m no expert, but I typically rely on a broad survey of independent research and government agencies.

Keywords: Overuse, regulation, harm, construction, research

Money that was approved in 2025 for more water resource development is a good start. We need to make sure it is used wisely and not given to unqualified developers. Texas must fully fund the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality and similar agencies to ensure public and animal health. Texas growers should be incentivized to grow products that use less water. Other agriculture conservation programs should be developed, funded and implemented. Texas should aggressively clean polluted waterways.

Keywords: Pollution, incentive, funding

Data centers and other mass energy users should be required financially contribute to the energy grid. Texas should join the national energy grid. Texas should restore funding and development of alternative energy methods.

Texas must lobby the federal government to restore the previous indirect cost cap, up to 20 percent. Fifteen percent is unreasonable and limits research. Texas should consider it’s own fund to assist researchers with indirect costs.

I was CEO of the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners for six years so herd immunity is important to me. Outreach to parents via trusted sources, like PTAs, PNPs and pediatricians, is important. Mass immunizations at early childhood and elementary schools should be instituted. Peer pressure is important to vaccination hesitancy and public health. I support funding and implementing these programs.

Peer reviewed research should be the foundation of good public policy. Meta analysis is possible and should be done on almost all topics to inform public policy and regulation. If there is no scientific consensus, the public policy should probably be deferred until there is. That might not always be possible. When public opinion diverges, a comprehensive, sustained public education campaign should be implemented. It’s hard to adopt policies that are not supported by the public, so sometimes its better to do nothing and wait until public knowledge catches up.

I support a strong, coordinated state and federal response to the current outbreak, including increased surveillance, rapid testing and reporting, continued sterile-fly releases, and resources to help producers and veterinarians respond quickly. We should also invest in long-term agricultural biosecurity, including research, veterinary and inspection capacity, and better coordination between state and federal agencies, universities, and producers.

I believe that large-load users should pay for the cost of the infrastructure needed to serve them as opposed to those being passed on to residential customers or small businesses through rate increases or fees. While I am generally supportive of economic development, I also believe we must examine tax exemptions and incentives that have drastically outgrown and outpaced the expected fiscal impact. Texans face rising costs, from groceries, gas, and necessities to larger insurance premiums and housing costs, and we need to ensure that policies intended to promote economic development do not exacerbate the inflation and affordability crises we are seeing or place additional burdens on those most impacted.

While I am proud of the investment we made last session with respect to water, we know that the $20 billion in funding that will be distributed over time is only a fraction of our expected need. I support water conservation, improving sustainability, and repairing aging infrastructure while protecting pristine streams and increasing water supply. Local jurisdictions do not have the resources to fix leaking and degraded pipes without support from the state and federal government. We also need to improve our planning processes and ensure that we have reliable, real-time data to make informed decisions and prevent crises such as those faced by Corpus Christi. When it comes to agriculture, we should work with farmers and ranchers to promote conservation and efficiency while protecting the long-term viability of our agricultural economy.

We must invest in a diverse, reliable energy system, expand transmission capacity, reduce congestion, and continue building out renewable generation. We should also invest in workforce training so Texans are prepared for the jobs being created by the clean-energy economy or able to retrain and transition into these industries. Instead of facilitating wind and solar, or at least providing incentives on par with more traditional generation, we often pass laws that disadvantage or undermine these industries. We should also invest in geothermal, biomass, and other emerging renewables. When it comes to data centers, we must distinguish between those used to support research, advanced computing, and consumer technologies we rely on from the hyperscalers and bad actors. I support requiring industry to pay their share of costs as opposed to passing them on to consumers, strict sustainability measures, water conservation, on-site renewable energy and battery storage, and empowering local communities to have meaningful input and decision-making ability with respect to placement, safety, sustainability standards, mitigation, and similar.

Research and innovation are under threat due to federal funding cuts as well as policies adopted by the state around tenure, academic freedom, curriculum, and free speech at institutions of higher education. Texas is an economic engine with great developments in space, advanced manufacturing, computing, and the sciences throughout our state’s history. We should roll back the policies that have made Texas less attractive to researchers and scientists while exploring additional state-level support for research and innovation. With as much progress as we have made in recent legislative sessions in terms of support for CHIPS, advanced electronics, and space-related industries, we should make comparable investments in our research infrastructure.

I serve on the Public Health Committee and am strongly committed to public health programs, vaccination programs, and preventative medicine that is based in science and facts. I do not support policies that make it easier to opt out of vaccines at the expense of community health. Lower vaccination rates can put medically vulnerable Texans at unnecessary risk and make it harder to prevent outbreaks. I support policies that promote vaccination, strengthen public health education and outreach, and protect our communities through prevention grounded in the best available scientific evidence. When Texans are concerned about vaccine safety, we should respond with clear, accurate information; work with community leaders who are trusted messengers and facilitators; and make sure healthcare providers have the resources to help Texans make medically-informed decisions based on sound science.

The Texas Legislature routinely ignores scientific evidence and experts when devising policy. I am vehemently opposed to that and believe that scientists, researchers, and experts should play a vital role in ensuring we are making evidence-based decisions that are in the best interest of Texans. When there are competing claims, each should be evaluated independently and weighed against the credibility of the source. With fields that are fast changing, it’s important that we be willing to be nimble and learn. With a part time legislature there are many fields where it’s hard for policies and regulatory frameworks to keep up with developments, but we should endeavor to do so.

I am currently drafting a bill that will establish a new department of the Texas government that will create an integration of the various different existing departments from Public Safety to the Texas HHS, and also integrate in all Texas universities and public research facilities, to create a team dedicated to the proactive deterrence, detection, response, and eradication of biological hazards such as the cyclospora and screw worm. The department will have funding in coordination with universities to establish strategically located facilities for research and active detection and deterrence across the state and at the border and ports of entry. This will allow active researchers and students to conduct their studies in live practice to protect the people of Texas, and US in coordination with those respective departments and agencies, to create the greatest threat detection and response network for biological hazards in the world. Integrating it with global information and public data sharing to make Texas into the world’s number 1 fighter of these threats, and greatest research institution for developing deterrence and eradication responses. This will fund the pipeline of specialists and scientists in this space as well. So I am fully behind finally establishing a real means to prevent these events from occurring in the future.

Keywords: Establishing deterrence and response infrastructure

I have three bills drafted to solve for the preservation of Texas water, growth of our own power generation, and sustainment of smart innovation and advancement of data centers. I’ve published a breakdown of this here: https://www.willcampbellfortexas.com/releases/texas-energy-and-data-center-policy-plan

The plan is not to stifle innovation, but to secure Texas’ intelligence and information infrastructure and security, improve the energy infrastructure thorough distributed energy generation, and to create the proper regulation and incentive structure for data center builders and energy producers to work together to solve this problem.

Keywords: Legislation to protect Texans and our infrastructure through innovation

The conservation of our water resources is vital to the future of Texas. I will support the proactive efforts and initiatives for finding solutions to solve both the flooding problems and retention of water in the state of Texas. I am dedicated to researching solutions to this problem and establishing/authorizing the Texas Water Board to perform the projects necessary to reduce the impact of flooding while finding more effective ways of capturing that water for the use of Texans for the long term.

Keywords: Dedicated to Legislation that will preserve water and reduce flooding impact.

Please refer back to my energy generation policy on this topic. https://www.willcampbellfortexas.com/releases/texas-energy-and-data-center-policy-plan

Keywords: I have drafted legislation to solve for our energy and infrastructure needs.

Having dependence on Federal funding for research is not a positive. It is a negative on our research institutions. The priorities of any federal administration change over time and it creates a funding infrastructure that is ever changing and disruptive. I am for passing legislation and solving for how we make our research institutions more independent and less reliant on Federal grants. This is a challenge I am currently researching how to solve for, but it cannot be a government solution - as the government is not the entity that should be controlling the freedom of scientific exploration and research. By fostering stronger relationships with private industry, this problem can be solved, but it requires closer relationships between private industry and Texas institutes of research to make it happen. I am committed to finding a solution for this problem through removing barriers and regulations that stifle innovation through government dependence for our research institutions.

Keywords: Removing dependence on government for funding research and innovation

I support medical freedom. I also support the implementation of gold standard science, which requires repeatable observations and demonstrable evidence and proof of validity of claims of efficacy for medicines and vaccines. I will also support the safe and economical promotion of a vaccine schedule that reduces its impact on early childhood development, and spread out the vaccination schedule to guarantee demonstrated reduction of risk to the population. But it is the right of the parents to decide for their children what the vaccines will be that they get.

Keywords: I am for medical freedom and parental rights, and promotion of a sound vaccine regime for children.

Scientific consensus is not the answer. Demonstration of repeatable results from multiple independent sources and the data demonstrating consistent results and a coherent application of scientific principles is what should be permitted as evidence in making policy decisions. Scientific consensus is merely opinion, and should not be the determining factor in making policy decisions. Scientists are not policy makers, they are fact finders. While scientifically derived evidence must always be brought before policy makers when they are making decisions - it is the facts alone that should be presented - not the opinions of scientists on policy. We learned that lesson the hard way over the past decade. The facts should drive the day.

Keywords: Repeated and consistent demonstration of results matter, not opinion of professionals, in matters of policy.

What I believe in is science, and I believe in listening to the scientists and experts who have devoted their careers to understanding these issues. I fully acknowledge that I am not an expert on screwworm, but I am willing to listen to those who are. I believe it was negligent to cut funding for programs designed to protect our livestock from serious threats. Our agricultural industry is too important to take those risks. I support policies that strengthen Texas’s agricultural biosecurity, protect our livestock, and ensure that we are prepared to respond to threats before they become a crisis.

Keywords: Science, Expertise, Preparedness

I support businesses that strengthen the Texas economy, create jobs, and contribute to our communities. What I do not support is giving data centers a free ride while Texans are left to shoulder the costs. We should not be handing out tax breaks and incentives while allowing these facilities to place enormous demands on our water and energy resources, strain our infrastructure, and negatively impact our environment and communities.

Data centers may create a significant number of jobs during construction, but once operational, they typically employ far fewer people. That means we need to take a hard look at whether the long-term benefits justify the public resources and tax incentives being given to these companies.

I believe Texas should stop putting corporate interests ahead of Texans. We need fair and responsible water and energy allocation, an end to unnecessary tax breaks and subsidies for data centers, and policies that ensure these facilities pay their fair share of the utility and infrastructure costs they create. Economic development should work for Texans, not at their expense.

Keywords: Accountability, Sustainability, Fairness

Water is one of our most precious resources, and protecting it must be a top priority. There should be no reasonable idea left on the table when it comes to preserving and improving the quality, availability, and sustainability of Texas water.

I would support policies that strengthen and modernize Texas’s water infrastructure, protect our water supplies, and ensure that communities have reliable access to clean water for generations to come. At the same time, we must recognize that agriculture is a cornerstone of the Texas economy. Our agricultural industry should remain strong and be an essential partner in water conservation efforts.

We can protect our water resources while supporting a thriving economy. But we must be willing to plan for the future and make responsible decisions today.

Keywords: Conservation, Infrastructure, Sustainability

I still remember when the Texas electric grid failed, and I remember the devastating consequences for Texans. We had been warned that a grid failure was possible, yet our state leadership failed to take the necessary steps to adequately prepare. I remember Texans being left without power during freezing temperatures and, tragically, people losing their lives.

We cannot allow that to happen again. Reliable electricity is not a luxury, it is essential to the safety, health, and economic security of every Texan. Our electric grid must be modernized and strengthened so that it can withstand extreme weather and meet the needs of a growing state.

I will support policies that improve the reliability and resilience of our grid, protect consumers from preventable failures, and ensure that Texas businesses have the dependable electricity they need to operate and grow. Texans deserve an electric grid they can count on, especially when they need it most.

Keywords: Reliability, Resilience, Accountability

Education is one of the most powerful tools we have to strengthen our communities and move society forward. We must invest in education, particularly in science, research, and innovation. These investments are essential to how we grow, adapt, and solve the challenges of the future.

As a lifelong educator, I understand firsthand the transformative power of education. I believe Texas should be a national leader in education, scientific research, and innovation. I will support policies that protect and strengthen Texas’s long-term research infrastructure, expand opportunities for students and educators, and ensure that our state remains at the forefront of discovery and progress.

Keywords: Education, innovation, research

I believe in the science behind vaccinations and in the researchers and medical professionals who dedicate their careers to making vaccines as safe and effective as possible. Vaccination has played a critical role in protecting individuals and communities from serious infectious diseases.

I recognize that no vaccine is perfect, and I believe it is reasonable to ask questions and continue researching safety and effectiveness. But our response to infectious disease outbreaks should be grounded in credible scientific evidence, reliable data, and the expertise of public health professionals, not fear or misinformation.

When communities have concerns about infectious diseases or vaccine safety, I believe the best approach is to listen respectfully, provide transparent information, and encourage people to make informed decisions based on sound science and evidence. As a lifelong educator, I believe we have a responsibility to help Texans understand the data and have confidence in the scientific process.

Keywords: Science, evidence, trust

Science is not something we should take lightly. Even the best scientists understand that healthy skepticism, careful questioning, and rigorous testing are essential to producing reliable results. Some of the biggest mistakes in science happen when researchers are pressured to move too quickly or when findings are rushed before they have been properly tested.

Good science takes time. It requires research, rigorous trials, careful review, and a willingness to question results before drawing conclusions. I will support policies that give scientists and researchers the time, resources, and independence they need to conduct thorough research and have confidence in their findings.

Keywords: Rigor, patience, integrity

I support fully funding USDA and APHIS so they have the resources to contain and eradicate New World screwworm quickly. That means investing in surveillance, sterile-fly production, veterinary response, research, and strong coordination with Texas officials and livestock producers. I also support assistance for ranchers who suffer documented losses or costs because of quarantines and required biosecurity measures. We know early detection and rapid response work, and protecting our livestock industry is far less costly than allowing an outbreak to spread.

I oppose expanding data centers in Texas when they place additional strain on our electric grid, water supply, and local communities while receiving significant tax incentives. Texas families and small businesses should not see higher utility costs or reduced access to limited water resources so that extremely large energy users can operate here. ERCOT is already implementing special review processes for large loads such as data centers because of their potential impact on grid reliability.

I would oppose additional tax incentives for data centers and support requiring these facilities to pay the full infrastructure costs associated with their electricity and water demands. Texas currently provides qualifying data centers with state sales-tax exemptions, which makes it even more important that we examine whether these projects provide enough long-term jobs and community benefits to justify those subsidies.

My priority is protecting reliable, affordable electricity and our water resources for Texas families, agriculture, and existing businesses first.

I support investing in replacing aging water infrastructure, especially in rural communities, with modern systems that reduce leaks, improve water quality, and provide a more reliable water supply during droughts. I would also support investments in water conservation, reuse, groundwater monitoring, and flood-control infrastructure.

When it comes to agriculture, I believe our farmers and ranchers must be treated as partners, not burdened with one-size-fits-all mandates. I support voluntary conservation programs, incentives for efficient irrigation and water technology, and technical and financial assistance that helps producers conserve water while protecting their ability to make a living.

My approach would be guided by protecting rural communities, strengthening our agricultural economy, maintaining affordable and reliable water, and making sure Texas replaces outdated infrastructure and plans responsibly for future generations.

I support policies that strengthen Texas’s electric grid, expand transmission capacity, and ensure we have enough reliable generation to meet growing demand. Texas families and businesses should be able to depend on affordable electricity during extreme heat, winter storms, and periods of high demand.

I also believe large energy users, including data centers, should pay the full cost of the infrastructure and additional capacity their operations require rather than shifting those costs onto residential customers and small businesses. ERCOT is already developing additional tools and processes to manage rapidly growing large loads and protect grid reliability.

My priority would be maintaining a reliable grid, investing in necessary transmission and resiliency improvements, and making sure everyday Texans are not asked to subsidize massive new electricity users. ERCOT’s 2026 planning continues to identify extreme weather, rapid load growth, and transmission constraints as significant reliability considerations.

I support protecting stable federal investment in NIH and opposing arbitrary funding cuts that could undermine Texas universities, hospitals, medical research, and the thousands of jobs they support. Texas receives about $1.9 billion in NIH funding across 118 research sites, making biomedical research an important part of our state’s economy and healthcare infrastructure.

I also believe federal reimbursement for research infrastructure should reflect the legitimate costs of laboratories, facilities, compliance, technology, and administrative support rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all cap. NIH’s proposed policy would replace negotiated indirect-cost rates with a 15% rate, a significant change in how research institutions are reimbursed.

At the state level, I would support strategic investments that help Texas remain competitive for federal research dollars, recruit talented researchers, and strengthen institutions conducting lifesaving medical research. Texas already has successful models such as CPRIT, which has leveraged state investment to support research, clinical trials, and recruitment of scientists.

My priority is making sure Texas remains a leader in medical and scientific innovation while protecting taxpayers and ensuring research dollars are used responsibly.

I believe the first step is listening to communities and making sure people have access to clear, accurate information from trusted healthcare professionals. Parents should be able to ask questions about vaccine safety and receive factual answers without being dismissed or talked down to.

At the same time, policymakers have a responsibility to protect children and communities from preventable infectious diseases. Texas’s 2025 measles outbreak resulted in 762 confirmed cases, 99 hospitalizations, and two deaths of unvaccinated school-age children.

I would support strong public-health education, readily available and affordable vaccinations, adequate funding for local health departments, and rapid testing and response when outbreaks occur. I would also rely on physicians, epidemiologists, public-health data, and established vaccine-safety research when evaluating policy. The CDC continues to identify two doses of MMR vaccine as highly effective protection against measles, while measles itself can cause hospitalization, pneumonia, brain swelling, and death.

My goal would be to rebuild trust, make reliable information and healthcare accessible, and protect our communities—especially children and people who are medically vulnerable.

I believe scientific evidence and expert input should play an important role in policymaking, particularly on issues such as public health, agriculture, water, energy, and the environment. Good policy should be based on reliable data, real-world impacts, and the best information available—not politics alone.

When scientific claims conflict or the evidence is uncertain, I would look at the quality of the research, whether findings have been independently reviewed or replicated, the credibility of the experts involved, and the potential consequences of acting or failing to act. I would also seek input from the people directly affected by the policy, including local communities, businesses, farmers, healthcare professionals, and other stakeholders.

When scientific consensus and public opinion differ, I believe policymakers have a responsibility to listen respectfully to public concerns while also being honest about what the evidence shows. Public trust matters, but difficult facts should not be ignored simply because they are unpopular. My approach would be to communicate clearly, remain open to new evidence, and make decisions that are responsible, transparent, and focused on protecting the long-term interests of Texans.

When threats occur, the best response is to focus on prevention first, then rapid detection and coordination. There needs to be support for ranchers and wildlife officials on identifying and reporting suspected cases. Additionally, I would examine whether small or family-owned producers have adequate access to veterinary services. I believe there should be biosecurity and investing in prevention methods is where we can save money. My decisions would be informed by the Texas Animal Health Commission, veterinarians, researchers, and agricultural producers.

I believe any investments we make to innovate and profit should benefit the life of our communities. Working families should not have to struggle more to make room for large companies when they lack other basic investments. This is important to me when I think about communities like those in House District 131. Some neighborhoods have experienced years of underinvestment and continue to struggle to access fresh, affordable food. We should take creating health services as seriously as we take incentives to attract billion-dollar data centers. For data centers, I would like greater transparency around their electricity and water demands.

Ensuring the long-term sustainability of our water resources requires a strategy that acknowledges the paradox of severe flooding occurring alongside persistent drought and groundwater exhaustion. I advocate for robust investment in modernizing our aging wastewater systems and expanding flood mitigation efforts. Enhancing our water supply through conservation and reuse is essential for every community. Because the agricultural sector is vital to our economy and a primary consumer of water, I support collaborative cost-sharing and incentives that empower ranchers and farmers to implement efficient practices. For families in House District 131, my priority is ensuring that neighborhoods which have historically faced underinvestment finally receive their equitable share of infrastructure funding and reliable access to safe, clean water.

Texans deserve to trust our electric grid during extreme heat and severe weather without worrying about skyrocketing utility bills. I’m excited to support initiatives that will strengthen our transmission infrastructure, uphold robust weatherization standards, and expand innovative energy storage and demand-response programs. As our population and economy thrive, we must ensure a diverse mix of reliable energy sources. Additionally, we must strategically plan for major new electricity users, like data centers, ensuring they contribute their fair share to infrastructure rather than placing the burden on residential customers and small businesses. I’m also committed to championing strong legislative oversight of ERCOT and the Public Utility Commission, as reliability, affordability, and accountability are key to a bright energy future for all Texans.

Texas universities, hospitals, and research institutions are major economic engines that create jobs, train scientists and physicians, and produce discoveries that improve people’s lives. I would support protecting stable federal investment in NIH research and oppose arbitrary funding changes that fail to account for the legitimate costs of maintaining laboratories, facilities, equipment, cybersecurity, regulatory compliance, and the workforce necessary to conduct high-quality research. At the state level, I would also consider targeted measures to protect strategically important Texas research capacity when temporary federal disruptions threaten major projects or researchers. Texas has invested decades in becoming a leader in medicine, science, technology, and innovation, and protecting that research infrastructure is both an economic-development priority and an investment in our future.

Public health policy must protect communities while also recognizing that trust cannot be built by dismissing people’s questions or concerns. I support evidence-based school vaccination requirements with appropriate medical exemptions, accessible vaccination services, and rapid public-health responses when outbreaks occur. At the same time, government needs to do a better job communicating with families through trusted physicians, schools, faith leaders, and community organizations, including providing information in the languages communities actually use. The measles outbreak demonstrated that vaccine-preventable diseases can still have serious consequences, particularly for children and vulnerable individuals. My approach would be to listen respectfully, provide transparent and scientifically accurate information, improve access to preventive care, and make decisions based on the best available medical evidence.

Scientific evidence and professional expertise are vital components of the policymaking process, particularly for complex issues like public health, energy, and agriculture. My approach involves examining the full body of evidence, prioritizing independently verified results that reflect broad consensus among researchers, while remaining mindful of potential biases. It is equally important to engage with families and local stakeholders whose lived experiences provide essential context that numbers alone might overlook. When expert consensus and public sentiment are at odds, our responsibility is to address those concerns through transparent communication without dismissing the underlying facts. Ultimately, I am committed to making decisions grounded in the best available medical and scientific evidence, while remaining flexible enough to adapt our strategies as new information emerges.

Texas should use every proven and science-based tool to protect farmers, ranchers, animals, consumers, and the state’s farm economy. This means bringing back strong oversight and scientific programs that may have been weakened over the past 2 years. Texas should also improve disease tracking, border protections, sterile-insect programs, support for producers, and training for future agricultural health workers.

The United States defeated screwworm before through a long-term, organized effort—not through fewer rules or voluntary action alone. Restoring the policies that worked in the past would be a good place to start.

Keywords: Restoring the policies that worked in the past would be a good place to start

Texas has no state rule that checks how private building projects affect the environment. Data centers show why that’s a problem. Here’s my plan.

First, bigger projects would face bigger reviews. If a project would use a huge amount of electricity or water, it would have to pass a state review first. The state would look at where its water comes from, how it stays cool, and how it affects the power grid. The project couldn’t get water service or connect to the grid until it passed.

Second, tax breaks would come with strings attached. Companies would only get them if they create real jobs and meet standards for saving water and energy. If they break those promises, they pay the money back.

Third, big power users would pay their own way. They’d cover the cost of hooking up to the grid and building new power lines. They’d also agree to use less power when the grid is strained—so families don’t see their electric bills go up to pay for data centers.

This plan is based on facts. State forecasts show power demand growing fast. State water data shows our underground water supplies are under stress. And past tax break programs didn’t always deliver what they promised.

I support increased funding for the Texas Water Development Board and commissioning a foresight study on “The Future of Water in Texas” — one that answers how to maintain a healthy water supply over a 100-year horizon.

The Southern Spirit transmission line is a step in the right direction, but much more investment is needed to stabilize the Texas power grid. Because the grid is critical infrastructure for the entire country, this must be a joint federal and state effort.

I would support reversing many of the federal cuts to the National Institutes of Health. In the meantime, the state should step in to keep critical programs operational until we re-establish federal funding.

I would support reversing many of the federal cuts to the CDC. I also support a medically informed path for a modified or delayed vaccine schedule in the early years, while supporting vaccinations for school-aged children entering public schools.

Policy should follow the data. Lawmakers owe the public decisions rooted in scientific evidence and expert judgment — not political ideology.

The spread of screwworm through livestock is a regulation issue. Texas can combat that by fulfilling the role of the FDA by regulating livestock corporations to protect the Texas livestock industry. We can expand the list of pathogens that corporations need to regulate in Texas to combat both historical outbreaks and possible unknown outbreaks. The evidence that would support my approach to legislation would be, “What kind of livestock diseases are being spread across the world that are coming back to Texas?” In knowing this, we can support policies that combat these specific diseases. I would also take into account research papers that identify what kind of livestock conditions create more opportunity for diseases.

Data centers need to pay for their own electricity and water. There needs to be deep regulation on how the water is disposed of because we can not allow forever chemicals to disrupt the Texas ecosystem. I support Texas being a leader in technological innovation however, that technological innovation has to show a direct benefit to Texas and Texans. This article supports my position: https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-are-contributing-to-pfas-forever-chemical-pollution

To support the improvement of Texas’s water infrastructure, I would focus on policies that improve the efficiency of Texas water pipes. I would support improving agriculture to shift to water efficient crops. As well as, supporting sustainable water infrastructure that can be used to clean Texas water and support the Texas ecosystem.

At the same time as water and electric infrastructure issues, college graduates have issues getting into entry level jobs. So, I would support funding programs that allow college students, and people looking to enter the workforce, opportunities to help manage and support the development of water and electric infrastructure. Specifically, building high voltage power lines, to ease congestion to move electricity from generation hubs to growing cities, and enforcing strict weatherization standards.

The strong research programs of Texas not only drive scientific innovation within Texas, it also brings students into the Texas college systems. Texas needs to continue to invest in research to continue being an economic leader. I would support having a minimum federal grant attached to every budget, that includes, research awards to universities in leading industries to ensure research development is protected.

There is no reason why measles should be having a resurgence anywhere. To engage with communities, I would require education classes for K-12 and offer vaccine education classes for parents and communities. I would support policies that require MMR vaccines to apply for any state or federal sponsor program, ex Medicaid, Medicare, or public schools. I believe that vaccines are a requirement to support a healthy society with high density populations.

I would highly respect the input of scientific studies to sway my opinion on the best way forward for how I feel morally. If public understanding and scientific understanding compete, it is the job of the government to educate communities on why the initial assumption may not be the correct one.

I would support strong funding for surveillance, rapid testing, veterinary capacity, sterile-fly deployment, and science-based livestock controls. I would also push to restore any critical biosecurity positions, programs, or safeguards lost during DOGE-era cuts if evidence shows those reductions weakened prevention or response. Texas should follow outbreak data and work with USDA, Texas A&M, veterinarians, and producers to protect herds and livelihoods.

I would support data center growth that strengthens, not strains, Texas. Large projects should bring or fund new power capacity, use water-efficient and closed-loop systems, report energy and water use, and avoid shifting grid costs onto families. Tax incentives should require measurable jobs, infrastructure, and community benefits. This approach protects reliability, lowers household costs, and helps future-proof the Texas economy.

I would invest in aging water infrastructure, flood mitigation, conservation, drought preparedness, and projects that expand reliable supply while protecting water quality. Agriculture must be a partner, not an afterthought, through incentives for efficient irrigation, reuse, and conservation practices that protect producers’ livelihoods. Texas should prioritize communities with unsafe or inadequate water systems while planning for long-term growth and resilience.

I would pursue an all-of-the-above reliability strategy: expand transmission, renewables, storage, distributed energy resources, and dependable dispatchable and baseload power. We should speed up interconnection and permitting while requiring major new loads, including data centers, to help add capacity rather than shift costs onto families. Texas can meet growing demand, strengthen reliability, lower costs, and future-proof our economy.

I would oppose arbitrary caps that undercut negotiated research costs and threaten Texas universities, hospitals, and medical centers. At the federal level, I support stable NIH funding and reimbursement based on actual research infrastructure needs. Texas should also consider targeted bridge funding when federal disruptions threaten critical labs, jobs, or clinical research. Protecting research protects patients, innovation, and Texas’s long-term economic competitiveness.

I would lead with transparent, respectful communication and trusted local messengers, including pediatricians, schools, faith leaders, and community health workers. I support strong school vaccination requirements with appropriate medical exemptions, better outbreak surveillance, and easier access to vaccines. Policy should be guided by public health evidence, while addressing misinformation with facts rather than dismissing families’ concerns.

Scientific evidence and expert input should be central to policymaking, especially when public health, safety, and major investments are at stake. I would weigh peer-reviewed research, data quality, expert consensus, and potential risks while remaining transparent about uncertainty. Public opinion matters, but when it conflicts with well-established science, leaders should explain the evidence clearly and make decisions that protect the public good.

I would work with the professionals and experts in this field to improve our agricultural biosecurity based on their recommendations. We have dealt with various outbreaks in different foods in the last year and we need to protect our residents.

Data centers must pay for the necessary grid upgrades for their energy demands. The state also needs to invest further in clean energy to meet the demands because clean energy is cheaper and better for our environment. The data centers corporations should be the ones paying for the infrastructure and energy needs for their development. I am against tax incentives or any public subsidies for data center development.

When it comes to water infrastructure we lose 1.5B gallons of water daily due to water leaks and line breaks. We need improvements and upgrades in our pipes and as a city council member that was one of the main things we worked on in Grand Prairie because we are an older city. I would use this in my considerations when it comes to tackling the water infrastructure concerns

Invest in renewable energy. Clean energy is the future and is already our main power supply in the summer months.

I would work with our federal lawmakers to see if the could pass legislation to protect our universities and hospitals funding.

Many of our communities are dealing with an increase in anti vax misinformation which has led to some indoctrination of parents and adults. I would engage with our communities honestly and show them the science while also understanding some of their concerns due to the lies they have been told. The main issue is trust in government and institutions and as a leader I will work to rebuild that trust so we can all be safe and not get sick.

I believe in science and understand that I don’t know everything. I would definitely follow the science in the decisions I make and work with experts in the fields and areas I am legislating on. When there are significant conflicting reports and beliefs within the scientific community I will perform as much research as I can and make the decision I believe is best for my constituents and for our state.

Before Austin creates another layer of bureaucracy, we need to act with urgency and listen to the ranchers, veterinarians, and agricultural producers on the front lines of this threat. New World screwworm is not an abstract policy debate, it is a direct threat to Texas livestock, rural jobs, family ranches, and the economic backbone of communities across South Texas.

Texas must move quickly on early detection, coordinated reporting, veterinary capacity, research, and rapid-response protocols that can stop an infestation before it spreads. The cost of swift action is far less than the cost of a statewide outbreak that devastates herds, disrupts commerce, and puts rural livelihoods at risk.

I would support practical biosecurity measures shaped by the people who understand the industry best rather than one-size-fits-all mandates written in Austin. Our goal must be clear: contain this threat, protect Texas producers, and make sure New World screwworm never gains a permanent foothold in our state.

Texas should welcome jobs, innovation, and investment, but not at the expense of the families, farmers, ranchers, and small businesses already carrying the burden of Texas’ rapid growth. Data centers may bring opportunity, but their enormous demand for electricity, water, land, and transmission infrastructure cannot be shifted onto everyday Texans through higher bills, strained resources, or unreliable service.

Large users should pay their fair share for the infrastructure their projects require. I support policies like Senate Bill 6 (2025) that recognize the serious impact major new electricity demand can have on grid reliability and affordability. If a company wants to build a massive facility in Texas, it should demonstrate that it has adequate power and water resources before breaking ground, not after local communities are left dealing with the consequences.

Water must be treated as the critical resource it is. In areas facing drought or declining groundwater, homes, farms, and ranches should not be pushed aside for corporate development.

Water is too important to Texas’ future to keep kicking the can down the road. Flooding, drought, population growth, aging infrastructure, and groundwater depletion are already putting communities, farmers, ranchers, and local economies at risk. Texans need action, not more studies that sit on a shelf while water supplies become less reliable.

We must keep investing in new water supplies, conservation, storage, flood-control projects, repairs to aging infrastructure, and technologies that help communities capture, reuse, and protect water that would otherwise be lost. The 89th Legislature made meaningful progress through Senate Bill 7 and the expansion of the Texas Water Fund. We should build on that work and make sure funding reaches projects that deliver reliable water, not endless paperwork and delay.

Agriculture must be a partner in this effort, not a scapegoat. Farmers and ranchers are among the first to feel the impact of drought and water shortages, and they have an essential role in conservation, groundwater stewardship, and practical water-management solutions. Texas does not need more red tape. We need accountable leadership, faster project delivery, and an infrastructure strategy that meets the scale of the challenge.

Texas cannot afford to gamble with grid reliability. Extreme heat, rapid population growth, and massive new demand from data centers are placing unprecedented pressure on the system. Texas families and businesses should not face higher bills or reliability risks because state planning failed to keep up with growth.

We need an all-of-the-above energy strategy that strengthens the grid with dependable generation, expanded transmission, better long-term planning, and the full use of Texas energy resources, including natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar. Reliable, dispatchable power must remain central to Texas’ energy future.

The companies creating enormous new demand must also help pay for the infrastructure required to serve it. Existing residential customers, small businesses, and local employers should not be forced to subsidize massive corporate power users. Texas must grow, but it must grow responsibly, with affordability, reliability, and consumers at the center of every decision.

Texas must remain a national leader in medical and scientific research. Our universities and hospitals attract world-class talent, create high-paying jobs, and develop the lifesaving treatments and technologies Texans depend on.

But Washington’s instability cannot be allowed to put Texas research at risk. When federal priorities shift from one administration to the next, Texas institutions should not be left scrambling to protect critical research, skilled jobs, and patient care. I support protecting Texas’s ability to compete for federal research dollars while building stronger, more durable partnerships with private industry, philanthropy, and innovators.

Texas has already shown leadership through programs such as the Governor’s University Research Initiative. We should build on that success, defend the research infrastructure that makes discovery possible, and ensure Texas remains a place where the best doctors, researchers, entrepreneurs, and ideas can thrive.

Parents have the right to make medical decisions for their children, and they deserve accurate, transparent, and trustworthy information when making those decisions. Families with legitimate questions about vaccine safety should be heard, never dismissed or talked down to.

Our responsibility is to ensure parents, schools, and local communities have clear, evidence-based information about disease risks, vaccine safety, and available options.

I support a public-health approach rooted in transparency, honest communication, and respect for parental rights. Texans should be able to trust that the information they receive is based on sound evidence, not politics, fear, or bureaucracy. The goal should be informed parents making informed decisions and communities prepared to protect their most vulnerable residents.

Scientific evidence should be an important part of policymaking. However, policymakers should look at the evidence itself rather than simply accepting a claim because it is presented as scientific consensus.

I would demand evidence that is transparent, repeatable, independently supported, and grounded in sound methodology. When credible studies conflict, policymakers must dig deeper: Who funded the research? Is the underlying data available? Can the findings be replicated? And most importantly, what will the policy mean for Texas families, workers, farmers, small businesses, and taxpayers?

Experts should provide the best available evidence, but elected officials are accountable to the people not unelected bureaucrats. Our job is to weigh the facts alongside economic reality, individual liberty, local conditions, and the voices of the Texans we serve.

When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, leaders cannot simply dismiss the public. They must be transparent about the evidence, honest about uncertainty, and clear about the tradeoffs. I will always support policies rooted in sound evidence, common sense, and the principle that Texans, not distant bureaucracies, should have the strongest voice in decisions affecting their lives.

This is an area where I have no expertise and would be substantially guided by experts in the area.

I would remove tax incentives in their entirety throughout the state. With respect to energy demands, I would insist that data centers build their own power plants (natural gas, nuclear). With respect to water usage, I would charge rates which increase with higher utilization, so as to drive efficiencies in the design of the center. In both water and energy consumption, I would strive for designs which create zero load on existing sources.

Agriculture is a major consumer of water, and I would encourage use of cultivation techniques (including irrigation techniques) which minimize water consumption. I would also encourage the construction of desalination facilities to use seawater. I understand that a high volume of water is also lost in transmission and so would encourage pipe repair and replacement to reduce water loss.

We can continue to build natural gas plants, but reliable power is best guaranteed by nuclear, in my opinion. I think the future is in modular reactors which can be interlaced into a strong grid while reducing loss through transmission (smaller reactors = more of them closer to where needed = less transmission loss and higher redundancy and mesh reliability).

When I was at MIT, if I am not mistaken the reimbursement rate was direct costs plus 50% for indirect costs. Rather than reduce reimbursement rates, I would be more inclined to look at the number of projects to determine whether they are appropriate (understanding as well that basic research does not necessarily have measurable outcomes).

I would restore the original meaning of the word “vaccine” (meaning that many newer “vaccines” would have to find a new word to describe themselves) and openly acknowledge flaws in the data and the research regarding effectiveness and side effects. By doing both things, trust in the “system” can be restored and more parents may well voluntarily vaccinate their children. The losses from failure to vaccinate need to be clearly described as well.

Your premise is bad. Scientific evidence is not generated through “systematic” testing and evaluation; it is generated through rigorous examination of facts, using unbiased rigorous and reproducible testing at a high quality statistical level which is then honestly and rigorously peer reviewed. When there is a high quality of intellectual rigor addressed to issues lending themselves to scientific inquiry, I would be highly reliant on experts in those fields who can and will honestly present the entire range of reasonable opinions. I would evaluate competing or uncertain scientific claims through a lens of skepticism and common sense, neither abandoning the ideas because they are competing nor necessarily accepting them because they emanate from “learned” sources. One always has to look at the assumptions underlying any opinion because in many cases, the assumptions used are determinative of the outcome. One also has to look at the agenda of the source of funding, because unfortunately science “outcomes” often trend toward the desires of the funding source.

Texas Agriculture is LIFE!! I am a retired Air Force combat veteran, and I learned a long time ago that waiting until a crisis gets worse is not a plan. We need strong monitoring, fast testing, veterinary teams on the ground, and clear communication with ranchers and farmers.

Small producers who do the right thing and report a suspected case, should be supported. We should help with treatment, quarantine costs, livestock losses, and biosecurity improvements.

We need veterinarians, agriculture experts, local producers, and state and federal agencies working together. Protecting livestock protects jobs, food security, and the Texas economy.

Keywords: livestock, ranchers, screwworm, agriculture, biosecurity, veterinary response

I serve on the House Energy Resources and Natural Resources Committees, so I have seen firsthand how fast data center growth is moving and how far behind Texas already is.

Less than 20% of all Data Centers in Texas reported their water usage and environmental impact to the The Texas Legislature, this is UNACCEPTABLE. I am not against technology, I’m against allowing Texas to turn in to The Wild West of Data Centers with no regulations or operating perimeters. The public deserves to know how much water it will use, how much electricity it will demand, what chemicals are in its cooling system, where its wastewater will go, how much noise it will create, and who is paying for the infrastructure. Most importantly, what are the long-term health risks to our commmunities.

Texas can support innovation without giving away our water, overloading the grid, or ignoring the people who live nearby.

Keywords: data centers, AI, cryptocurrency, water, ERCOT, utility costs, tax incentives, water accountability

I serve on the House Natural Resources Committee, but I have also seen these issues up close through the humitarian work i do with my nonprofit, Uniting America Outreach.

During the July 4, 2025 Historic Hill Country floods, we helped organize volunteers, move supplies, support search and recovery efforts, and assist families who had lost nearly everything. That experience made it clear that flooding is not just an infrastructure issue. It is about whether families get warned in time, whether roads and bridges hold up, and whether communities have the resources to respond. Then again, on my birthday, this year, July 16, 2026, not only did the Hill Country experience a similar flood, but this time it extended to Uvalde County with the flooding of the Nueces River.

Texas needs stronger flood warning systems, better drainage, updated water and wastewater infrastructure, and more support for rural communities.

At the same time, we have to prepare for drought and protect our groundwater. Farmers and ranchers should be part of the solution. I support helping them afford better irrigation systems, water-saving technology, and other conservation tools without threatening their livelihoods.

We need practical solutions that protect people, agriculture, and our water supply, while saving the lives of those who live in areas impacted by Historic Floods.

Keywords: flooding, drought, water infrastructure, agriculture, groundwater, rural communities, disaster response

As a member of the House Energy Resources Committee, I see grid reliability as a public safety and National Security issue. I have also seen what happens when the grid fails. As a Native New Yorker who knows the impact of real snow and blizzards as part of our daily lives, I was confused as to why our grid would fail.

During the winter freeze, my nonprofit, Uniting America Outreach responded directly to families and vulnerable residents who were without power and heat. Senior Citizens died in our city. That is not just a system failure. That is a human loss.

Texas families should not have to wonder whether the power will stay on during extreme heat or another freeze. We need stronger transmission, reliable generation, weatherization, battery storage, energy efficiency, and backup power for nursing homes, senior communities, hospitals, water systems, emergency shelters, and other critical facilities.

We lack the information to understand data centers’ impact on the Texas Grid. Large power users should pay their fair share. Families and small businesses should not be forced to scrap pennies while the big corporations profit.

Texas must prepare before the next emergency and protect its residents.

Keywords: grid reliability, seniors, winter freeze, ERCOT, data centers, consumer protection, emergency response

I retired from the military medical field, where research was a major part of our mission. Better research meant better treatment, better readiness, and better outcomes for service members and their families.

That is why I strongly support protecting stable NIH funding with a full research budget. Laboratories, equipment, staff, safety systems, and administrative support are mission essential for Texas Readiness. Scientists and medical professionals deserve support to do the work that keeps us safe and health.

Texas universities and hospitals are saving lives, creating jobs, and developing treatments that benefit veterans, children, & families.. I support strong federal NIH funding, fair reimbursement for the true cost of research, and state contingency support for critical programs facing significant budget cuts.

Texas Biomed is an institution in my community that was instrumental in developing the COVID 19 Vaccine. Lives were saved based on the work my constituents did in the name of Science. We should not weaken the very institutions working to find cures, improve care, and prepare us for the next medical crisis.

Keywords: NIH, military medicine, medical research, Texas Biomed, veterans, hospitals, universities, innovation

As a military medical profession, measles is not harmless. Texas children are hospitalized and even died due to measles.

I support strong public education, accurate outbreak reporting, mobile vaccination clinics, school and community partnerships, and faster response when cases are identified. I also support making vaccines easy to access, especially in rural and underserved communities.

Parents deserve honest information about both the benefits and risks of vaccines. They also deserve to know the real danger of preventable diseases.

Protect our children.

Keywords: measles, vaccines, children, public health, trust, access, prevention

Scientific evidence should be a major part of policymaking, especially when decisions affect public health, energy, water, agriculture, and the environment.

As a retired military medical professional and a member of the House Energy Resources and Natural Resources Committees, I have seen how important it is to rely on good data, qualified experts, and real-world results. But I also believe the people living with the consequences of policy deserve to be heard.

When experts disagree, I look at the quality of the research and the risks of acting or failing to act. I also ask whether the evidence matches what communities are actually experiencing.

My job is to listen, explain the evidence clearly, and make the best decision I can to protect Texans.

Keywords: measles, vaccines, children, public health, trust, access, prevention

The New World screwworm outbreak is alarming and has grave implications for the Texas economy and businesses as well as pets and livestock. I am concerned that some of the policies and cuts made federally have hindered detection and response, and so we should examine and rectify any gaps as well as independently review what other policies should be put into place. Moving forward, we should also prioritize early detection, rapid response, coordination with international partners, and sustained funding for animal-health infrastructure.

I am supportive of calls for a moratorium until stronger sustainability conditions are met. Many communities are wholly unable to stop harms from data centers and current regulations are inadequate. At a minimum, they must fund their own infrastructure upgrades, pay impact fees, meet energy-efficiency and water-use limits, use modern cooling, and provide co-located clean energy and storage. In forming this position, I have as well as listened to constituents, met with environmentalists, and heard concerns from labor leaders about the impacts to good trade jobs that currently exist within data centers, advanced manufacturing, and similar industries.

Texas has a water crisis and the legislature has not done enough to address it. The investments and dedicated funding are a good start, but we know they are not enough to address the anticipated scope of the problem, which some estimates put closer to $150 billion in new water supply and infrastructure repairs and improvements. We have to develop new water supply, improve planning and coordination among communities, and increase conservation efforts. I would like to see a focus on repairing aging pipes, upgrading treatment plants, and improving monitoring systems to better detect leaks or deficiencies in systems. I also believe we must increase water storage capacity while also increasing resiliency by encouraging water reuse and recycling, rainwater harvesting and greywater systems, drought-resistant irrigation and landscaping, and conservation. Similarly, I am highly concerned with the impact of data centers and am supportive of calls for a moratorium until improved sustainability conditions can be met. When it comes to agriculture, we can provide support and incentives to farmers and businesses to increase conservation, adopt more efficient irrigation practices, and invest in technologies that reduce water use while maintaining productivity.

Texas faces extreme weather and rapid growth. As such, I believe we have to continue to increase energy generation and improve transmission while prioritizing wind, solar, and other renewables. Similarly, I believe large load consumers must be required to pay more of their fair share with respect to the infrastructure upgrades as opposed to costs being passed on to ratepayers and small businesses. I support energy efficiency programs because they save consumers money, reduce pollution and waste, and can increase equity. I also support providing funding, especially for low-income communities and areas with older homes, to weatherize their homes, increase their energy efficiency, and install smart technologies to improve energy usage. We should also work with local governments and school districts to upgrade HVACs, lighting, and equipment in their facilities in order to reduce usage.

I believe what is happening at many of our institutions of higher education is devastating and will have long term negative impacts on our ability to recruit and retain top faculty, researchers, and innovators. I believe we should restore tenure, promote academic freedom and free speech, and increase research funding. While we should push the federal government to restore funding we should also find more avenues to increase funding at the state-level.

A plank of my healthcare platform includes implementing statewide programs for early childhood screenings, vaccinations, and chronic disease prevention and management. I believe that it is our responsibility as leaders to listen to concerns, promote sound science, and push back on misinformation when it endangers public health. Additionally, I believe it is essential that we encourage and enable providers and public health officials to engage in public information campaigns and clinical experiences that are culturally competent and multilingual in order to build trust, reduce barriers to care, and ensure that every Texan has the information and support they need to make informed decisions about their health.

From my experiences as an educator to a labor leader and Assistant Deputy Secretary in the Biden-Harris Department of Education, I have supported evidence-based best practices and policies supported by data. I intend to rely on evidence, facts, and experts in weighing policy decisions. When there are conflicts, we have to make the best judgements we can using what is available at the time. That includes seeking additional insights and inputs, examining competing claims, and clarifying biases and agendas.

My approach will be to wait for the recommendations the Department of Agriculture brings before the legislature.

Data centers are crucial infrastructure for the future of Texas, and I am fully in favor of them. That said, I believe that tax incentives for them are unnecessary. It is important to ensure that data centers solve their own water and energy needs so that they do not burden those systems.

Response not provided to Question 3.

Texas needs to embrace the expansion of nuclear energy as a low-cost, dispatchable source of energy.

Texas universities need to narrow their focus to improve Texas’s research infrastructure. Right now, our system encourages as many children to enter our colleges and universities as possible, which leads to many students having degrees that do not align with the workforce needs Texas has, and results in decades of debt for students without much chance of return on their investment. More students should be encouraged to pursue Career and Technical Education, which will result in better career outcomes for those students, and allow universities to focus more on excellence and less on maximizing the total number of degrees awarded.

I had my kids vaccinated, and I encourage them to vaccinate my grandchildren. I do not believe it is the proper role of the state to mandate vaccination.

I love science. Unbiased scientific evidence is important to ensure that policy is as effective as possible. Science’s effectiveness as a tool is unfortunately often limited, however, by pre-existing personal and institutional biases and agendas. For example, as a Christian I have seen scientists claim that life came from a primordial soup without the influence of a creator, when the scientific statistical probability of the conditions necessary for life to be present without a creator is more or less zero. Any discussion around the validity of science needs to separate the scientific method of inquiry from biases of those utilizing that tool.

I’m currently speaking with ranchers I know on how to combat these problems and am open to more dialogue with experienced individuals to learn about how the state should assist in preventing these problems.

I do not support data centers taking water from the public and especially from farm and ranch land. I would bring legislation to prevent this.

I think data centers need to build separate power generation to support their buildings in rural areas and not suck the main grid’s energy. I’d move farm/ranching to the top of the water allocation pyramid and being the only thing above residential needs.

I’d look for land that is unusable for farming and residential development to have data centers built on and fields that could build power on that would allow sustainable grazing to develop around it; that would be public grazing land.

I’m still doing more research on how development is draining the water reserves and how we can make water retention alongside continued development to make the development burden a net zero on the water infrastructure.

Make data centers build and supply their own power generation.

I’m doing more research on how these facilities with AI development are going to be needed and how they will need to be redesigned to be more efficient for testing with AI doing much of the initial screening processes that used to take years in these labs.

Response not provided to Question 6.

Scientific evidence is extremely important in developing policy. Science needs to be based on the gold standard, and AI will continue to make it easier to fact-check and analyze scientific claims for accuracy.

Representative Howard recognizes the need for timely and coordinated action between the state and federal governments to prevent the further spread of the screwworm outbreak. She supports the actions taken by the Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC) to quarantine infected populations and believes we should leverage Texas’s robust research ecosystem to enhance diagnostic and testing capabilities. For example, Texas A&M Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Laboratory recently deployed a rotation of staff members to South Texas to assist a USDA mobile animal disease laboratory in identifying new cases. Rep. Howard will always consult with state agencies, field researchers, ranchers, and other stakeholders to inform her response and ensure that the community has access to all the appropriate resources to prevent further spread of the outbreak.

As data center construction rapidly expands across Texas, Representative Howard believes that we need thoughtful policies which address community and environmental concerns while allowing the state to continue serving as a hub for technology and innovation. She supports policies that give local governments the necessary land-use and regulatory authority to ensure developers are responsive to community concerns and follow through on promised economic investments including job opportunities and paying property taxes. Part of this local control also includes allowing communities to reject a proposal for a data center if they don’t want it.

To address environmental concerns, Representative Howard supports legislative action to create statewide operating standards which can be adapted to the environments of different regions and encourage local partnerships. For example, while all data centers would be required to be water efficient, a data center in West Texas could cooperate with local partners to utilize the abundance of produced water to cool their systems. These statewide operating standards would also require data centers to build infrastructure which reduces noise and light pollution.

In regard to electricity usage, Representative Howard believes that data centers should pay for their electricity usage and the infrastructure needed to connect to the grid. For data centers which generate electricity off the grid, she believes that they should be employing a mix of thermal generation and renewable energy such as solar to reduce harmful pollutants produced by gas generators.

Representative Howard believes that there is tremendous potential in making Texas a hub for AI development in the world. However, she believes that this development must be done in partnership with local communities and the industry leaders must be willing to be responsible environmental stewards. Due to the local impact that data center construction has on communities, Representative Howard believes that providing Texans with accurate data about the opportunities and challenges of data centers will be key to shaping the policy discussion. To inform her positions on this issue, she has consulted with fellow legislators, environmental non-profits, mechanical engineering professors, and constituents.

Having access to a sustainable supply of water is probably the most critical issue facing Texas’s long-term viability. One of the greatest challenges surrounding water policy across the state is the diversity of water systems, which all require different solutions. Representative Howard believes that the Legislature can be most effective by adequately funding supply, infrastructure, and conservation projects that local water development boards identify. This is no small task, and will require massive new funding commitments.

According to the 2027 State Water Plan, the state will need to invest $174 billion over the next 50 years to keep up with the water demand. While Rep. Howard appreciates the Legislature’s $20 billion appropriation for water infrastructure and supply projects over the next twenty years; she believes that Texas needs a more sustainable funding mechanism. Last session, she authored HJR 126, which would’ve transferred excess dollars from the state rainy day fund into the Water Fund and provide a more consistent stream of dollars without the need for new appropriations. Unfortunately, this legislation didn’t pass last session but she will continue working with her colleagues on innovative solutions to increase funding for water.

Another key part of addressing the water crisis to improve conservation efforts and replace outdated infrastructure. When considering the water needs of the state, it’s important to factor in the supply we currently have. Representative Howard believes is very supportive of increasing funding for conservation and reclamation programs. For example, the City of Austin’s purple pipe program reclaims wastewater for irrigation, cooling, and toilets. This reclaimed water is less expensive than drinking water to treat, making it a smart investment for the state to help cities preserve potable water for their growing populations.

When faced with policy decisions on agricultural water use, Representative Howard believes it’s important to work with legislators and local water planning groups whose communities are directly impacted by these policies. Additionally, she often consults the expertise of universities with robust agricultural and environmental research programs such as Texas A&M.

A final key policy issue to address the state’s water crisis is reforming our planning process to provide legislators with more up-to-date information on water usage. Representative Howard believes that the Texas Water Planning process should be updated on a biennial basis rather than every five years to help legislators make more informed decisions based on current data. This would allow legislators to be more responsive to sudden changes in water usage such as the explosion of data centers or new conservation technologies becoming available across the state.

Improving grid reliability will be a key factor in ensuring Texas remains a desirable place to live and do business. Representative Howard believes that increasing energy supply and building additional transmission infrastructure will be crucial to address rapid load growth.

To meet the increased energy demand, Texas must utilize its uniquely diverse energy portfolio to increase existing generation capabilities in thermal, solar, and wind while also building out nuclear and geothermal capabilities. She supported the establishment of the Texas Energy Fund in the 88th Legislative Session to improve the state’s ability to fund these projects. As the state moves to address the concerns of grid reliability, we also need to consider how to improve energy efficiency among residents. Representative Howard supports expanding the uses of the Fund to include incentivizing homeowners to make efficiency upgrades such as improved insulation and installing residential solar. As the Legislature looks to address the increased strain on the grid, Representative Howard believes we have an opportunity to make historic investments in generation, transmission, and efficiency which can meet the needs of both current and future generations of Texans.

While Texas is more than capable of meeting the energy needs of the State, we do not have the adequate infrastructure to move the power to where it’s needed. Representative Howard believes that the state needs to leverage public and private partnerships to invest significant capital into building out additional transmission lines that serve all energy types. Specifically, Rep. Howard is supportive of building 765 kV lines which can transport more energy with less land use, and less wasted energy.

Representative Howard believes that the top-tier research produced by Texas’s higher education institutions is one of the state’s greatest exports. As the Vice Chair of the House Higher Education Committee, she is committed to ensuring that Texas’s research institutions remain competitive and well funded.

Because the federal government makes up such a large percentage of funding for our research institutions, Rep. Howard believes that this is an opportunity to generate bipartisan support among Texas policymakers at the state and federal levels. Representative Howard will work with her colleagues in the Legislature and partners in Congress to coordinate their efforts and ensure that Texas remains a priority state for research dollars.

Another opportunity to ensure that Texas remains competitive for research funding is to encourage more joint proposals from higher ed institutions. For example, Representative Howard recently attended a technology and innovation forum where Dr. Jeff Prevost of UT San Antonio described the joint proposal submitted by 16 Texas universities and 3 national labs in response to the National Science Foundation’s Quantum Leap Challenge. While this proposal unfortunately didn’t get selected, it created a much more interconnected research ecosystem that could serve as a model for leveraging all of our top-tier research institutions for competitive funding.

Another advantage that Texas has for attracting research investment is its role as a hub for business and industry. As a leader in energy, agriculture, healthcare, and IT, Texas should leverage these public-private partnerships not only to drive capital investment, but also to apply research in the field. For example, Rep. Howard has been a strong advocate of getting Texas power companies to adopt distribution fault anticipation technology to prevent wildfires caused by faulty power lines. This technology was patented by Dr. B. Don Russell at Texas A&M and can autonomously monitor power lines and alert operators about potential system failures weeks in advance. This technology has been adopted across the west coast and in other countries such as New Zealand, but has yet to see widespread adoption in Texas. Rep. Howard sees this as an opportunity for Texas companies to further invest in research and technology developed by our higher ed institutions to address a critical issue facing our state.

Representative Howard is greatly concerned by the drop in the measles vaccination rate and growing distrust of vaccines in the State of Texas. As a policymaker and a former nurse, Representative Howard has been active in trying to increase access to vaccinations and improve education and awareness regarding vaccine safety.

Representative Howard has been working on a bill for years that would reform our outdated immunization registry. Currently, Texas is one of only four states with an explicit “opt-in” requirement for our immunization registry. This “opt-in” system has created barriers for physicians and health departments, particularly when it comes to interacting with Electronic Health Records (EHR). Her bill streamlines the consent process by automatically including Texans in the registry while providing clear instructions for individuals to opt out. As vaccination rates fall across the state and health officials have to respond to public health crises such as the measles outbreak, the need for this bill becomes increasingly evident.

In regard to engaging with communities that are skeptical about vaccine safety, Representative Howard believes that this is a communication issue rather than a legislative policy issue. She believes it’s important for providers to foster an ongoing dialogue with patients and families about the effectiveness of vaccines, while also creating an environment where questions are welcomed.

Scientific evidence and expert input are central to Representative Howard’s policy-making process. During the Legislative session, Representative Howard and her colleagues consider thousands of bills across a variety of complicated subjects. Because legislators can’t be experts on every policy area, Representative Howard is very proactive in reaching out to experts who can provide relevant insights and share evidence-based data to help inform policy decisions.

Representative Howard prides herself on a long career of putting policy over politics which can sometimes mean taking a vote that is politically unpopular if the data leads to a different conclusion. In these instances, Representative Howard makes an effort to communicate with her constituents and help them understand how the data informed her decision-making process. Even if they don’t agree with all of her votes, she wants constituents to feel that their input is heard and for them to understand her choices.

In instances where scientific evidence diverges from public opinion, Representative Howard tends to side with the established scientific community. She believes it’s important to review a wide range of evidence and cross-check data with other specialists in the field. In the end, she will go where the facts and science leads her. For example, an issue where she often has to contend with competing claims is related to abortion healthcare. While there are physician-led groups who oppose abortion and a wide range of beliefs in the court of public opinion, the general consensus among the medical community is that abortions are a proven medical procedure that should be available to physicians to protect the health and safety of women. She recognizes this procedure as a safe medical procedure that should be available to pregnant Texans.

There are a lot of ranchers in my district, so the screwworm epidemic must be contained. Further spread could devastate the local economy. To combat this, cattle owners must be incentivized to do the right thing and report screwworm to contain the spread. Texas has seen screwworm epidemics before in living memory, and it took years to sort out.

Keywords: The screwworm epidemic must be contained.

This issue is affecting my district at this very moment. The true impact of data centers must be studied. Local communities should then be given all the information and be part of the decision-making process. I would go so far as to say local communities should hold a special referendum to decide whether to allow data centers to be built in their area.

Keywords: Communities should hold a special referendum to decide whether to allow data centers.

Farms and ranches don’t pollute on purpose. It’s merely a terrible side effect of the business. All parties must come to the table to discuss how to meet the needs of everyone: farmers, ranchers, and local communities alike. We must incentivize the use of products and methods that are less harmful to the environment. Ideally, the agricultural community could maintain its output while also protecting resources and the environment.

Keywords: Incentivize the use of products and methods that are less harmful to the environment.

We must invest in infrastructure, including the power grid, to ensure it meets our needs for the decades to come. Much of our infrastructure is outdated. We should adopt the newer, more efficient, more durable technologies available.

Keywords: Invest in infrastructure.

Research is the heart of human advancement. We must invest in the future by protecting research funding and institutions, as well as researchers themselves.

Keywords: Invest in the future.

I respect people’s bodily autonomy. However, vaccines are a proven tool for fighting disease. Furthermore, failing to vaccinate affects the rest of the population. It is not merely a personal opinion. Opting out of vaccinations should remain possible but be subject to much stricter requirements, similar to conscientious objector status that allows citizens to opt out of Selective Service.

Keywords: Vaccines are a proven tool for fighting disease. Failing to vaccinate affects the rest of the population.

Science doesn’t choose sides. As a lawmaker, I’d like to think I would follow the science in so far as it was available, especially when in matters of life and death. But I will say that we all do things every day for emotional, rather than logical, reasons because they bring us comfort.

Keywords: Science doesn’t choose sides. I would follow the science.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Texas agriculture is the livelihood of many families and communities across our state. We cannot afford to wait until an outbreak becomes a full-blown crisis before we act.

I support expanding early detection, livestock monitoring, rapid testing, and proven tools like sterile-fly releases to stop the spread. We also need better coordination between Texas, USDA, veterinarians and local producers.

I’m no expert, but I know we cannot create policies from Austin without listening to the experts who are farmers and ranchers. The ones actually impacted.

We know what worked to eradicate screwworm before. Let’s follow and utilize the science, listen to our producers, and act early. Protecting Texas agriculture means protecting Texas families, jobs, and our economy.

Keywords: Scientific facts should not change based on what is politically popular

I support requiring large data centers to pay their fair share. Especially when the people of communities are speaking out against them. Communities are feeling undermined by BIG TECH, we can’t simply continue to take from our resources and communities. Tech growth should strengthen our economy, not shift the cost onto taxpayers and working families.

Keywords: Texas can remain competitive without writing a blank check.

Water is essential. I support investing in aging water and drainage infrastructure, fixing leaks, expanding flood mitigation, protecting groundwater and holding polluters accountable for contaminating our waterways.

But conservation cannot be at the expense of the farmers. Agriculture must have a seat at the table. I would support incentives and resources that help producers adopt water-saving technology and conservation practices. Texas needs a long-term water strategy that protects our supply while supporting the communities and industries that depend on it.

Keywords: Texas should prepare for both sides of our water challenge too much water when it floods and not enough when drought comes.

Grid reliability is personal to me. I lived through Hurricane Harvey, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Beryl. I’ve watched family, friends, and neighbors lose electricity during some of the moments when they needed it most.

Those experiences shape how I approach this issue. I support an all-of-the-above strategy that strengthens transmission, adds reliable generation, and improvement in weatherization, that prepares our grid for both extreme heat and severe storms.

Texas demand for electricity is growing. Data centers and other large users can bring economic opportunity, but families and small businesses should not be left paying for the infrastructure their projects require. Large users should pay their fair share.

As a first-time candidate and community builder, I believe solutions start by bringing people to the table energy experts, workers, businesses, local communities, and everyday consumers and focusing on what works.

For me, reliability means more than numbers on an ERCOT report. It’s whether a family can keep their home safe after a hurricane, whether a senior has air conditioning during extreme heat, and whether a small business can reopen after a storm. Texas families deserve a grid that is reliable, resilient, and affordable.

Keywords: Reliability means more than numbers on an ERCOT report.

Research funding is an investment in Texas jobs, our universities and hospitals, and the medical and scientific breakthroughs that can improve lives. With approximately $1.9 billion in annual NIH funding supporting research across Texas, protecting that infrastructure also means protecting our economic competitiveness.

I support a stable and transparent system for reimbursing legitimate research costs rather than an arbitrary, one-size-fits-all cap. Research does not happen in a vacuum. Laboratories, equipment, utilities, technology, safety requirements, and administrative support are all part of what makes medical and scientific research possible.

At the same time, protecting research funding does not mean writing a blank check. Institutions receiving taxpayer dollars should be able to demonstrate where that money goes. I support transparency, regular review of negotiated rates, and strong accountability measures to ensure public dollars are being used for legitimate research needs.

At the state level, Texas should strengthen partnerships among universities, hospitals, the private sector, and state agencies and consider targeted investments that protect critical research infrastructure when federal funding becomes uncertain.

Texas has built a strong medical, scientific, and research economy. We should protect that investment while demanding accountability for taxpayer dollars. My goal is for Texas to continue competing for researchers, jobs, investment, and the next generation of medical breakthroughs not watch those opportunities move to other states.

Keywords: We should demand accountability for taxpayer dollars without undermining the research ecosystem those dollars helped build.

Public health works best when people trust the information they receive. When parents have questions about vaccines or infectious disease outbreaks, they deserve clear answers, credible information, and the opportunity to speak with healthcare professionals not judgment or political rhetoric.

I support keeping parents informed about outbreaks in their schools and communities, strengthening access to vaccines through pediatricians, pharmacies, and local health departments, and ensuring rural and underserved communities have access to care. Texas should also invest in disease surveillance and rapid-response systems so local officials can identify and contain outbreaks quickly.

I believe vaccine policy should be guided by medical evidence, public health data, and transparency about both benefits and potential risks. State leaders should work with physicians, nurses, schools, faith leaders, and trusted community organizations to communicate accurate information in ways that meet people where they are.

Texas must also take seriously declining vaccination rates and outbreaks of preventable diseases like measles. Protecting individual choice and protecting vulnerable people in our communities, including infants and people who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons, requires thoughtful policymaking.

Keywords: We should demand accountability for taxpayer dollars without undermining the research ecosystem those dollars helped build.

Scientific evidence and expert input should be an important part of policymaking, especially when decisions affect public health, energy, agriculture, and our environment. But policymakers also have a responsibility to ask questions, understand the evidence, and consider how decisions affect everyday Texans.

When scientific claims compete, I would look at the quality and independence of the research, whether findings have been replicated, the level of scientific consensus, potential conflicts of interest, and input from multiple qualified experts. When the science is still developing, we should be transparent about what we know and what we don’t—and be willing to adjust policy as better evidence becomes available.

Public opinion matters because people live with the consequences of the policies we pass. But scientific facts should not change based on what is politically popular. When public opinion and scientific consensus differ, leaders should listen to concerns, communicate the evidence clearly, and explain why a decision is being made rather than dismissing people’s questions.

Good policymaking requires evidence, transparency, and listening. Science helps us understand the likely consequences of our choices, while communities help us understand how those choices affect real lives. I believe we need both to make practical, responsible decisions for Texas.

Keywords: Scientific facts should not change based on what is politically popular.

I would want to fast track the sterile fly facility in South Texas to begin getting the sterile fly into the reproductive cycles as early as possible. This has been shown to be one of the most, if not the top most, preventative measure to protect our livestock and other animals. I would also like to see strict enforcement of animal movement restrictions and reporting to make sure any affected livestock are not continuing to move further into the country. Mostly, I would push for the rehire of Animal and Plant Health Service employees to be reinstated to continue doing the monitoring work that we have seen is necessary to prevent this issue from being in Texas.

I would like to see a halt to the currently proposed data centers in their current form. I do not believe the necessary studies (environmental, feasibility, and impact) are currently being conducted, and this information needs to be transparently shown to the residents in the communities looking to implement data centers. I am not in support of the current structure, as the demand on water and property are extensive and the value to the communities has yet to be seen. With Texas, especially our panhandle, prone to drought, and an aquifer that is recharging well below the rate of depletion, I think that this area of the country is not well suited for these investments. We rely on water for agriculture and livestock, and with the beef capital of the world in my district, we need to maintain our water in our communities. I also believe the 1904 rule of capture law needs to be evaluated, as this law is well over 100 years old and does not meet the needs of the current times.

I am of the firm belief that we need to implement bold action to solidify Texas water. I would be supportive of desalinization efforts, and investments into technology to better equip every part of Texas with clean water. I also believe that there should be locally controlled MUDs and Water development boards in place to study and implement new strategies to guide usage and replenishment with state investments to implement these policies.

Well, for one, I would not allow any new data centers to connect to this grid, as the strain is already present and the addition of these folks would not aid in the struggle. However, in the region of Texas that I live, we are on the Southwest Power Pool (SPP). This grid is more heavily regulated and less decentralized, which has provided the benefit that during winter storm Uri, our panhandle communities were largely powered and more stable than those communities tied to ERCOT. I would like to see a more reliable system like the one our panhandle communities rely on.

This would be something that a Federal Candidate would have more experience in answering, as the NIH reports to congress. That said, I do not want to see a cap of this type set, in fact, I want to see more investment into research infrastructure. If this were to pass, I would want to work with my friends in the legislature to see how we could implement this funding to assist with the gap NIH is proposing to create.

Vaccines work, and we must dispel any rumor that they do not. I would want to see more accountability from those who elect not to participate in the recommended vaccine schedule, and make sure that we are protecting the vulnerable who are unable to receive these vaccines regardless of desire. I trust science, I trust medicine, and I will work to uphold the standards that have proven to be effective.

There have been times where the public opinion and the science were at odds, and this will happen again. I believe that educating people, being transparent, and providing fact based evidence to people will always be the best path to dispel fake news of any kind. I believe in science, and believe that we should use all available data to make informed choices, even if the public opinion differs.

Texas should respond aggressively to New World screwworm while making sure the burden of containment does not fall unfairly on the ranchers who are doing the right thing.

I support strong surveillance and early detection, adequate staffing for inspectors and veterinarians, rapid diagnostic capacity, targeted animal-movement restrictions when necessary, and continued use of sterile insect technology. Sterile insect releases helped eradicate screwworm from the United States in the past, so this is an example of using a proven scientific tool rather than starting from scratch.

Quarantines and movement restrictions should be based on actual surveillance and risk and should be as geographically targeted as possible. When government restrictions are necessary to protect the broader agricultural economy, Texas should also consider financial assistance for producers who suffer documented losses because they reported an infestation and cooperated with containment efforts. We should never create a system in which a rancher has a financial incentive to delay reporting a suspected case.

I also support sustained investment in agricultural biosecurity beyond the current outbreak, including rural veterinary capacity, Texas university research, improved monitoring technology, and coordination with federal and local officials.

Border and livestock-movement restrictions should be based on current disease surveillance and scientific risk assessment, not politics. As new evidence becomes available, Texas should be willing to adjust its response.

My guiding principle is simple: follow the pest, follow the data, and use the least disruptive measures that will effectively protect Texas livestock and the people whose livelihoods depend on them.

Keywords: Early detection and surveillance; proven sterile insect technology; targeted quarantines; protect cooperating ranchers from extraordinary losses; invest in veterinary and research capacity; evidence-based border controls; follow the data.

Texas can welcome technological investment without giving billion-dollar corporations a blank check.

I support requiring major data center developments to complete independently reviewed assessments of their projected water use, electrical demand, infrastructure needs, traffic, environmental impacts, and effects on surrounding communities before final approval. Those studies should be paid for by the developer, conducted under transparent standards, and made available to the public.

Water use must be treated seriously, particularly in rural communities that depend on groundwater. Large data centers should disclose their projected annual and peak water demand, the source of that water, drought-year usage, effects on aquifers and neighboring wells, and available conservation or reclaimed-water alternatives. When a project creates measurable infrastructure or environmental impacts, the developer should be responsible for appropriate mitigation.

I also believe large new electrical loads should pay a fair share of the transmission, substation, and other infrastructure costs they create. Residential customers and small businesses should not see their utility bills increase because a hyperscale data center requires major new grid infrastructure.

During genuine grid emergencies, hospitals, water systems, emergency services, homes, and other critical needs must come before large industrial computing loads that can safely reduce consumption.

I support giving counties meaningful authority over hyperscale data center development in unincorporated areas, including the ability to establish reasonable requirements for setbacks, noise, water protection, road impacts, emergency planning, and other local concerns. Counties should also have the authority to temporarily pause major developments when additional study of cumulative impacts is necessary. Residents deserve public notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard before major agreements are finalized.

I do not support special tax carve-outs for hyperscale data centers. Texas should be a good place to do business, but that does not mean taxpayers should subsidize some of the wealthiest corporations in the world. If a project is economically viable, it should pay its fair share of taxes and infrastructure costs.

I would also prohibit nondisclosure agreements that prevent public officials from informing their constituents about proposed developments with major effects on community resources, and I support financial assurance or bonding for eventual decommissioning so taxpayers are not left with future cleanup costs.

Economic development is valuable, but it should not come at the expense of water security, grid reliability, local communities, or ordinary taxpayers.

Keywords: No special tax carve-outs; growth pays for growth; independent water and energy impact studies; protect residential ratepayers; county authority and local control; public notice and transparency; developer-funded mitigation; protect groundwater; no secret deals.

Texas needs a long-term water strategy that treats conservation, infrastructure, groundwater protection, flood management, water quality, and agriculture as connected issues rather than separate problems.

My first priority would be fixing the infrastructure we already have. Texas should invest in repairing aging pipes, leaking rural water systems, treatment facilities, pumps, wastewater infrastructure, and other systems that waste water before it ever reaches a home, farm, or business. We should expand water reuse, reclaimed-water systems, conservation, groundwater recharge where appropriate, and new water-supply projects when repair and conservation alone are not enough.

Agriculture should be treated as a partner in conservation, not as the enemy. Farmers and ranchers help feed Texas, support rural economies, and often operate on much tighter margins than large industrial users. If we ask producers to invest in more efficient irrigation, soil-moisture technology, precision agriculture, or other conservation measures that benefit the entire aquifer, Texas should help make those investments affordable through grants, cost sharing, technical assistance, and other incentives.

I support strong local groundwater management and better scientific monitoring of aquifer conditions. Texas should make it easier and more affordable for communities that want groundwater protections to establish and operate groundwater conservation districts, including access to technical assistance and reliable data.

At the same time, I believe we should distinguish ordinary agricultural use from large new industrial or commercial groundwater withdrawals. Major new industrial users should be required to disclose projected withdrawals, assess effects on aquifers and neighboring wells, demonstrate conservation efforts, and address harm caused to surrounding water supplies.

I would not support a one-size-fits-all statewide requirement to meter every agricultural well. Aquifers and local conditions vary considerably across Texas. I do support expanded voluntary and incentivized agricultural metering, allowing local groundwater districts to require measurement when conditions warrant it, and providing state assistance so the cost does not fall entirely on producers.

On water quality, identifiable polluters should be held accountable. For agricultural runoff and other diffuse pollution sources, I favor conservation partnerships, technical assistance, and practical mitigation before punitive approaches whenever those methods can effectively protect water quality.

Finally, Texas should stop treating flooding and drought as unrelated. Where technically appropriate, flood-control investments should also consider stormwater capture, retention, aquifer recharge, and other ways to preserve water for future use.

Conservation should help keep Texas farms productive, not regulate them out of existence.

Keywords: Fix aging infrastructure first; agriculture as a conservation partner; incentives instead of unfunded mandates; protect groundwater; stronger scrutiny of large industrial withdrawals; local groundwater management; hold polluters accountable; connect flood and drought planning.

Texas needs a reliable electric grid, but reliability should not become an excuse for blank checks, poor planning, or shifting unnecessary costs onto residential customers.

I support maintaining and enforcing strong weatherization requirements for generators and transmission facilities. Compliance should be verified through meaningful inspections, and there should be real consequences when companies fail to meet required standards. Reliability also requires fuel security; dispatchable generation is only useful if it can actually obtain fuel during extreme conditions.

Texas should maintain a diverse energy portfolio. I do not believe reliability should become a partisan contest between natural gas, wind, solar, nuclear power, battery storage, or other technologies. We should evaluate resources based on reliability, affordability, resilience, environmental impact, and the role each can play in supporting the overall system.

I support strategic expansion of transmission infrastructure, but major investments should be based on validated demand rather than speculative projects that may never be built. Companies proposing extremely large new electrical loads should demonstrate meaningful financial commitment before Texans are asked to finance major infrastructure on their behalf.

Large new industrial customers should pay an appropriate share of the grid costs they create. A Texas family should not pay a higher electric bill because a hyperscale data center requires a new substation or transmission expansion.

During grid emergencies, large flexible industrial loads should be expected to reduce consumption when it can be done safely so that hospitals, water systems, emergency services, homes, and other critical needs can remain powered.

I also support energy-efficiency and demand-reduction programs when they are more cost-effective than building additional generation or transmission. Helping homes, schools, businesses, and public facilities improve HVAC systems, insulation, energy controls, storage, and other efficiency measures can reduce peak demand without sacrificing safety or comfort.

Texas should also strengthen backup-power and resilience capabilities for hospitals, water and wastewater systems, emergency facilities, shelters, and other critical community infrastructure.

Finally, when the state provides financing or other support to private energy developers, Texans should receive a measurable public benefit in return. Projects should have enforceable performance requirements, taxpayer protections, accountability, and clear reliability benefits.

Public money should buy a public benefit.

Keywords: Reliability without blank checks; enforce weatherization; diverse energy portfolio; validated demand before major transmission spending; large loads pay their share; protect critical services; energy efficiency and resilience; accountability for state-supported projects.

Texas has an enormous stake in maintaining a strong and stable research infrastructure. Our universities, hospitals, scientists, clinicians, technicians, and research staff contribute to medical innovation, economic development, workforce growth, and discoveries that improve lives.

I oppose arbitrary blanket caps on legitimate research infrastructure costs. Facilities and administrative expenses are not simply unnecessary overhead; they can include laboratories, utilities, information technology, regulatory compliance, hazardous-material management, data security, and other systems required to conduct responsible research.

I support continuing a negotiated, evidence-based reimbursement system in which institutions document legitimate costs and federal agencies review those costs. At the same time, taxpayer dollars should always be subject to transparency, auditing, and accountability. The answer to concerns about research costs should be careful oversight, not an arbitrary one-size-fits-all reduction that could destabilize institutions conducting very different types of research.

I also support greater predictability in federal research funding. Multi-year scientific studies, clinical trials, laboratories, and research teams cannot responsibly plan when funding rules change abruptly in the middle of ongoing work. Significant changes in federal research policy should be evidence-based, transparent, and implemented through an orderly process with adequate transition periods.

Texas should not automatically replace every federal funding reduction dollar-for-dollar. That could create an unsustainable open-ended obligation for state taxpayers. However, I would support carefully targeted temporary bridge funding when a sudden federal disruption threatens high-value ongoing Texas research, critical clinical trials, or specialized research capacity that would be difficult or impossible to rebuild once lost.

Research infrastructure is also human infrastructure. When research funding becomes unstable, Texas risks losing scientists, clinicians, technicians, and years of specialized expertise. Those consequences should be considered when policymakers evaluate proposed cuts.

Fiscal responsibility does not mean starving research of the infrastructure necessary to conduct it. It means paying legitimate costs, requiring accountability, protecting valuable long-term investments, and ensuring taxpayers receive meaningful value from those investments.

Keywords: Protect Texas research infrastructure; oppose arbitrary blanket caps; negotiated evidence-based reimbursement; transparency and auditing; stable long-term funding; protect ongoing research and clinical trials; targeted bridge funding when necessary; research infrastructure is human infrastructure.

Public-health policy works best when people trust the information they receive. I do not believe the right response to vaccine concerns is to ridicule or dismiss parents who have questions. Policymakers and health professionals should listen respectfully, provide clear and accurate information about risks and benefits, acknowledge uncertainty when it exists, and make credible medical guidance accessible.

At the same time, infectious diseases do not stop with one household. Vaccination decisions can affect infants, immunocompromised individuals, and others who may be unable to protect themselves. Policymakers therefore have an obligation to consider both individual choice and community health.

I support maintaining Texas’s existing school vaccination framework, including legitimate medical, religious, and reasons-of-conscience exemptions. However, I believe Texas should restore a more deliberate and accountable process for obtaining a conscience exemption rather than making blank exemption affidavits instantly downloadable. Families who have sincere objections would still retain the right to seek an exemption but exercising that exemption should involve an affirmative request rather than making opting out as frictionless as downloading an ordinary school form.

I also support strong outbreak-specific protections. During a confirmed outbreak or meaningful exposure, public-health officials and schools must be able to use evidence-based measures to protect students, staff, and vulnerable members of the community, including temporary exclusion from school when medically appropriate.

Texas should also invest in vaccine access, public education, trusted community partnerships, and clear communication from medical professionals. Barriers such as cost, transportation, lack of a regular healthcare provider, or difficulty obtaining appointments should not prevent families who want vaccination from receiving it.

Any future changes to Texas vaccination or exemption policy should be informed by Texas-specific disease and exemption data, infectious-disease specialists, pediatricians, epidemiologists, schools, parents, and local public-health professionals.

The goal should not be to win an ideological argument. It should be to prevent avoidable illness and death while maintaining public trust and respecting legitimate concerns.

Keywords: Listen without dismissing concerns; maintain current exemption rights; restore a deliberate conscience-exemption process; strong outbreak protections; improve vaccine access and education; protect vulnerable Texans; use Texas-specific evidence.

Scientific evidence should be foundational to policymaking, particularly when government is making decisions about public health, agriculture, water, energy, environmental regulation, infrastructure, or emerging technology.

My approach would begin with the best available evidence before deciding what I want the answer to be. Policymakers should not begin with an ideological conclusion and then search for an expert or study that supports it.

When scientific claims conflict, I would examine the quality and weight of the evidence. That includes whether research has been peer reviewed, whether findings have been replicated, the size and quality of the evidence base, whether multiple independent sources reach similar conclusions, the qualifications of the experts involved, the relevance of their expertise, known limitations, and potential financial or organizational conflicts of interest.

I do not believe that simply finding two people who disagree means there are automatically two equally credible scientific positions. Sometimes the evidence is genuinely uncertain. At other times, decades of replicated research overwhelmingly support one conclusion while a small number of claims point elsewhere. Policymakers have an obligation to understand that distinction.

A genuine scientific consensus deserves substantial weight because it generally reflects a large body of accumulated evidence. At the same time, science must always remain open to testing and revision. I would respect scientific consensus while remaining willing to reconsider policy when credible new evidence changes our understanding.

Policymakers should also be transparent about uncertainty. The public deserves to know what we understand, what remains uncertain, what assumptions are being made, what risks are being considered, and what new evidence might cause a policy to change.

Uncertainty should not always mean inaction. When the potential harm is severe and the available evidence strongly suggests preventive action is warranted, precaution may be appropriate even before every question has been resolved. The response, however, should remain proportional to the evidence and the potential risk.

When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, elected officials must listen carefully to the public. Community values, lived experiences, costs, rights, and acceptable tradeoffs are legitimate parts of democratic policymaking. But public opinion should not require government to distort or ignore factual evidence.

Experts help us understand the facts and likely consequences of different choices. The public helps determine values and priorities. Elected officials are responsible for responsibly integrating both.

Finally, policymakers should explain the evidence behind major decisions and be willing to change course when better evidence emerges. Changing policy because the evidence changed is responsible leadership, not weakness.

Science should inform policy, not dictate values—but policy should never require us to ignore facts.

Keywords: Evidence before ideology; evaluate the weight and quality of research; scientific consensus deserves substantial weight; transparency about uncertainty; proportional precaution; listen to public values without ignoring facts; explain decisions; change policy when the evidence changes.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Texas must treat agricultural biosecurity as essential infrastructure. I support rapid livestock testing, targeted quarantines, animal-movement tracking, sterile-fly deployment, and direct assistance for producers who report infections early. Farmers and ranchers should not be financially punished for helping stop an outbreak.

Our response should follow USDA and veterinary evidence, protect rural economies, and be reviewed regularly so emergency restrictions remain targeted rather than unnecessarily broad

Keywords: Biosecurity is essential infrastructure. Reward early reporting. Protect livestock and rural livelihoods.

Data centers should disclose their projected water and energy use and pay for the infrastructure their operations require. Tax incentives should depend on permanent jobs, conservation, and community benefits, not higher utility bills for Texas families.

I support repairing aging water systems, reducing leaks, improving drainage, protecting water quality, and expanding water reuse. Farmers should be partners through voluntary conservation incentives and affordable irrigation upgrades.

I support stronger weatherization, more transmission and energy storage, and a dependable mix of power sources. Large industrial users should accurately report demand and pay their fair share of grid upgrades.

I support stable NIH funding and oppose arbitrary cuts that weaken Texas research institutions. These investments support jobs, medical discoveries, and better patient care.

I would listen respectfully and work with trusted doctors, schools, churches, and community leaders to provide accurate information. I support disease monitoring, accessible vaccines, timely public alerts, and school requirements with legitimate medical exemptions.

Scientific evidence and qualified experts should guide policy. I would examine the quality of the research, expert qualifications, conflicts of interest, and risks of delay while explaining uncertainty honestly to the public.

Increase funding to speed up efforts to eradicate the infestation, educate farmers on how to identify the pest, and provide resources for treating infected livestock. We’re already looking at potentially billions of dollars in costs if this turns into a full-scale outbreak. Let’s increase funding and use it proactively, to the degree we can, to avoid further negative impacts to our farming and beef industries. We know how to eradicate this parasite, but we cannot afford to rely on a single solution or wait for the problem to worsen. We should use every effective tool available, including the proven method of sterile-male releases, treatment, and controlling or restricting livestock movement.

I will always place the needs of people over the needs of corporations. Priority should be given to the people we serve, not corporations that donate to campaigns. The tax incentives we have in place have contributed to the rapid growth of data centers, which will only exacerbate the strain on our resources, especially during periods of extreme weather. I say we roll these tax incentives back and make data centers commit to investing in our infrastructure before they can build. The money gained from eliminating sales tax breaks and some property tax abatements can be used to fund our public schools and other programs within our state. If you want evidence, look no further than the billions in sales-tax revenue the state is projected to lose out on because of these exemptions.

Texas has a huge problem with leaking pipes and aging water infrastructure. It’s estimated that over 180 billion gallons of water are lost every year due to deteriorating infrastructure, water that could otherwise remain available for growing communities and agriculture. Texas should prioritize fixing this system in the 90th Legislature. And although an expensive option, we should explore investing in desalination facilities for cities that are closest to the Gulf.

The most essential thing is to prioritize grid reliability for Texas consumers, instead of putting the interests of large businesses ahead of them, especially during times of extreme weather or emergencies. As a leader in renewable energy production, the state should be looking at more ways to incentivize consumers, not protecting fossil fuel use. Making the switch to renewable energy, along with investing in power storage or modernizing our grid, is a realistic way we can reduce consumer dependency on the grid and improve its reliability.

We have seen an increase in strategic funding cuts for public schools and institutions of higher learning. My stance is simple: keep politics out of schools and encourage learning environments within them. Funding for research in healthcare facilities is essential. Previously eradicated diseases have returned, different strains of illnesses are constantly emerging, and new viruses continue to pose threats to our communities. Cutting funding for our research institutions amidst this changing environment is asking for trouble. I would support protecting federal research funding while pursuing state investments where necessary to maintain Texas’ research infrastructure.

Skeptics have done so much damage by contributing to deteriorating trust in science and medical experts. Part of this can be attributed to the increased spread of misinformation through social media platforms. For one, we should look at ways to increase transparency around the spread of false and even questionable health information online, while also expanding public-health education and making reliable information more accessible. We should work on rebuilding trust in our communities, and that all starts with transparency.

Representatives come from all sorts of backgrounds, meaning there are certain things we are not experts on, and other things we are more educated to speak on. However, we do not know everything, and we never will. I’ve always respected the work that scientists do because they use empirical data through observation, testing, and peer review. My decisions will be based on the best available evidence and the expertise of qualified professionals. At the same time, I recognize that scientific understanding can evolve as new evidence emerges. When public opinion and scientific opinions differ, I believe our responsibility is to listen to both, and ultimately make decisions based on the best available evidence and the public interest.

Our farmers and ranchers are not only feeding Texas, they are holding together the economies of our rural communities. When something like New World screwworm threatens their livestock and livelihoods, I believe the state has a responsibility to respond quickly, transparently, and with the people actually working the land at the center of that response.

I would support strong coordination between the Texas Animal Health Commission, Texas Department of Agriculture, USDA, veterinarians, local officials, and livestock producers. That includes fully funding surveillance and rapid testing, making sure producers know exactly how and where to report suspected cases, and ensuring state veterinary and animal-health personnel have the resources to respond immediately when a case is identified.

I would also support continued use and expansion of proven eradication tools, including the sterile insect technique, which has historically been critical in controlling New World screwworm. Texas should work aggressively with federal partners to ensure adequate sterile-fly production and deployment wherever surveillance indicates it is needed. I do not want Austin making agricultural policy from behind a desk without listening to the people who raise our cattle and work our land. My approach would be to listen to producers, veterinarians, and agricultural experts; follow the best available science; act early; and make sure Texas farmers and ranchers are never expected to shoulder a statewide biosecurity crisis alone.

I support economic development, but economic development cannot come at the expense of the natural resources that sustain our communities. For me, water comes first. In rural Texas, water is not simply another resource to allocate. It is the foundation of our farms, ranches, communities, and future generations.

As a state representative, I would support requiring large data center developments to provide transparent, independently reviewed assessments of their projected water and energy needs BEFORE receiving approvals. Communities deserve to know how much water a project will use, where that water will come from, what effect that withdrawal could have on local aquifers and existing users, and what additional electricity infrastructure will be required.

This is particularly important in rural Texas, where groundwater supplies can already be under pressure. I would support stronger conservation requirements for high-volume industrial users, including water-efficient or closed-loop cooling systems where feasible, water reuse, and limits or additional safeguards in areas where groundwater availability cannot sustainably support the proposed demand. I do not believe we should sacrifice a resource that our communities will need for generations in exchange for short-term economic development.

I would also insist on meaningful local input and transparency before these projects are approved. Rural communities should not learn about a massive development after agreements have already been negotiated behind closed doors. Farmers, ranchers, landowners, municipalities, groundwater districts, school districts, and residents deserve a seat at the table before decisions are made that could permanently affect their water, land, infrastructure, and quality of life.

On energy, I believe large data centers should pay their fair share (if not more) of the infrastructure necessary to serve them. Texas families and small businesses should not see their utility bills increase because the state has attracted enormous new industrial loads. When new transmission, generation, substations, or other infrastructure is primarily necessary to serve these facilities, we should examine policies that appropriately assign those costs to the companies creating the demand rather than automatically spreading them across ordinary ratepayers.

I would also do away with Texas’ data center tax incentives. Texas currently provides qualifying data centers with significant sales-tax exemptions that can last 10 or 15 years, while qualifying large data center projects can receive exemptions for 20 years. I do not believe taxpayers should provide substantial incentives simply because a company promises a large capital investment. There should be no incentives because they should want to bring measurable benefits to the community. This includes permanent jobs, responsible water use, infrastructure investment, environmental safeguards, and protections for local taxpayers, and there should be accountability when those commitments are not met.

My position is not that Texas should reject technology or economic development. It is that growth must be responsible and sustainable. A project may bring investment today, but we have to ask what that community will look like 20, 30, or 50 years from now.

When making these decisions, I would rely on groundwater availability and aquifer data, projected electricity demand, infrastructure costs, independently verified water-use projections, the number and quality of permanent jobs created, and, most importantly, the voices of the people who actually live in the affected communities.

The people of rural Texas should NEVER be told that sacrificing their water, paying higher utility costs, or changing the character of their communities is simply the price of progress. Our natural resources belong in the conversation before the contracts are signed, not after.

Keywords: Transparency, no incentives, voices, never

Water is life in Texas, and nowhere is that more apparent than in our rural communities. We cannot talk about the future of Texas without talking about the future of our water.

I would support a comprehensive approach that focuses first on conservation, infrastructure, and long-term planning. Texas needs to invest in repairing aging and leaking water systems, improving wastewater infrastructure, expanding water reuse and conservation, protecting water quality, and building flood-control infrastructure that protects communities while looking for opportunities to capture and beneficially use water when possible.

I also believe rural Texas must receive its fair share of those investments. Small communities often do not have the tax base or staff capacity of our major metropolitan areas, but a failing water system in a town of 3,000 people is no less important to those families than one affecting hundreds of thousands of people in a city.

When it comes to agriculture, I would not approach conservation by simply telling our farmers and ranchers to use less water. Agriculture is fundamental to our economy, our food supply, and the identity of rural Texas. Farmers are also some of the people with the greatest interest in ensuring that our groundwater is available for future generations.

Instead, I would make farmers and ranchers partners in conservation. I would support expanding grants, low-interest loans, and cost-sharing programs that help producers adopt more efficient irrigation systems, soil-moisture technology, metering, drought-resistant practices, and other proven conservation strategies. We should reward conservation and innovation rather than impose unfunded mandates on producers who are already dealing with high input costs and unpredictable weather.

We also need to protect our groundwater with the future in mind. That means decisions about large new industrial water users should consider the cumulative impact on an aquifer, not simply whether water is available today. Our agricultural producers and rural communities should not be asked to conserve while enormous new developments are allowed to withdraw groundwater without the same expectation of conservation and accountability.

I support an all of the above approach to strengthening the Texas grid. We need reliable generation, renewable energy, battery storage, improved transmission infrastructure, energy efficiency, and continued investment in technologies that make our grid more resilient. My priority would not be choosing winners and losers among energy sources. It would be building a system that Texans can depend on during both extreme heat and extreme cold.

We also have to recognize that the demands being placed on our grid are changing. Large industrial users and data centers can consume enormous amounts of electricity. Economic development is important, but we should not approve massive new loads without knowing whether the generation and transmission infrastructure exists to support them.

I support requiring large electricity users to pay their fair share (if not more) of the infrastructure necessary to serve them. Working families, farmers, ranchers, and small businesses should NOT see their utility bills increase because the grid needs billions of dollars in new infrastructure to serve a massive corporate development.

Texas must also continue strengthening and weatherizing critical generation, transmission, and natural-gas infrastructure. Winter Storm Uri demonstrated what happens when failures across interconnected systems occur at the same time. Reliability planning has to account for extreme heat, extreme cold, drought, population growth, and rapidly increasing industrial demand.

I would oppose abrupt federal policies that substantially reduce support for research infrastructure without a careful evaluation of what those cuts would mean for patients, researchers, universities, and taxpayers. Indirect costs are not simply administrative overhead. They help pay for the laboratories, utilities, cybersecurity, regulatory compliance, research administration, equipment, and other infrastructure required to conduct federally funded research safely and effectively.

As a state legislator, I would want Texas to examine how we can strengthen our own research infrastructure. That includes protecting investments in our public universities and health institutions, supporting competitive research programs, developing partnerships between universities, medical centers, and the private sector, and strengthening the pipeline of scientists, physicians, nurses, engineers, and other highly skilled workers Texas will need in the future.

I would also insist on accountability. Public research dollars should be spent responsibly, indirect costs should be transparent and justifiable, and institutions receiving taxpayer funding should be able to demonstrate how those dollars support the research mission. But accountability and fiscal responsibility should not mean weakening the infrastructure that makes groundbreaking research possible.

I would be especially concerned about what large funding reductions could mean outside our largest metropolitan areas. Rural Texans already face significant barriers to health care. Research conducted in Texas can help us address issues such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, infectious disease, maternal health, mental health, agricultural health, and the shortage of health professionals in rural communities. We should be looking for ways to connect Texas research investments to the needs of communities across the entire state.

Public health works best when there is trust between families, health professionals, schools, and government. When parents have questions about vaccines or infectious diseases, I don’t believe our response should be to dismiss them or shame them. We should listen to their concerns, provide accurate information, and make sure they have access to trusted medical professionals who can answer their questions.

At the same time, as policymakers, we have a responsibility to take infectious diseases seriously. Texas experienced its largest measles outbreak in decades in 2025, with hundreds of confirmed cases and the deaths of two unvaccinated school-age children. Those are not statistics we should ignore.

I support making vaccines readily accessible and affordable throughout Texas, particularly in rural communities where families may have fewer pediatricians, pharmacies, clinics, or transportation options. I would invest in our local public health infrastructure and make sure rural health departments, schools, physicians, and community organizations have the resources they need to educate families and respond quickly when an outbreak occurs.

I also support greater transparency around vaccine safety. Parents should have access to clear information about the benefits and potential risks of vaccines, how vaccines are evaluated and monitored for safety, and what we know from scientific evidence. If legitimate safety concerns arise, they should be investigated openly and communicated honestly.

During an infectious disease outbreak, I believe decisions should be guided by the severity and transmissibility of the disease, the best available medical evidence, and the responsibility to protect people who are especially vulnerable. That includes babies who are too young to receive certain vaccines and people who cannot be vaccinated for legitimate medical reasons.

Schools also have a responsibility to protect students and staff. As an educator, I understand how quickly illness can spread through a classroom. I would support clear, evidence-based outbreak protocols developed with public health professionals so that schools and parents know what to expect before a crisis occurs.

I also believe we have to address why vaccination rates are declining rather than simply arguing with families about it. Is it misinformation? Lack of access to health care? Different problems require different solutions. Government cannot rebuild trust by demanding it. We rebuild trust through transparency, consistency, accessibility, and honest communication.

Scientific evidence should play an important role in policymaking because the decisions we make in Austin have real consequences for people’s health, livelihoods, communities, and futures. Whether we are talking about water, agriculture, energy, education, or public health, I want decisions to be informed by the best evidence available rather than political pressure or whoever has the most influence in the room.

Scientific evidence, however, is one part of policymaking. Evidence can help tell us what is happening and predict the likely consequences of different choices, but elected officials must also consider costs, individual rights, economic impacts, feasibility, local circumstances, and the experiences of the people affected by a policy.

That is particularly important in rural Texas. An expert in Austin may understand the science behind groundwater depletion, for example, but the farmer who has depended on that aquifer for generations understands realities on the ground that also need to be part of the conversation. I want both of those voices at the table.

Texas cannot afford to let New World screwworm turn into a full-scale agricultural crisis. We know what happens when outbreaks are caught too late, so the state needs to act now.

I would make sure the Texas Animal Health Commission, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension, and local veterinarians have the resources to identify cases quickly and stop them from spreading. Ranchers and livestock owners also need clear, practical information about what to look for and where to report a suspected case.

Texas should work closely with USDA and use strategies that have already proven effective, including the sterile insect technique that helped eliminate screwworm from the United States before. This is not complicated: follow the science, use the tools that work, and respond quickly.

We also have to protect producers from taking the financial hit alone. Quarantines, treatment costs, livestock losses, and movement restrictions can be devastating, especially for smaller operations. Reporting a possible outbreak should not threaten someone’s livelihood.

The bottom line is simple: prevention costs less than crisis response. Texas should invest now, protect our livestock industry, support our producers, and stop this problem before it gets worse.

Keywords: The bottom line is simple: prevention costs less than crisis response.

Texas should be much more cautious about the rapid growth of data centers. These facilities can consume enormous amounts of electricity and water, while creating far fewer permanent jobs than many other large developments. I do not think the state should be handing out generous tax incentives without asking whether the long-term benefit to Texas communities actually justifies the cost.

My biggest concern is making sure regular Texans are not forced to subsidize this growth. If a data center requires new transmission, additional generation, or major upgrades to local infrastructure, the company should pay for the demand it is creating. Families and small businesses should not see higher utility bills because a massive corporation decided Texas was the cheapest place to operate.

I would also support much stronger disclosure and oversight of water use. Communities should know exactly how much water a project is expected to consume before incentives or major approvals are granted, especially in parts of the state already facing drought and water-supply concerns.

I would also reevaluate the tax incentives Texas currently offers data centers. Any incentive should come with strict requirements for local economic benefit, responsible resource use, and real accountability. If a project cannot demonstrate that it is worth the strain it places on our grid, water supply, and communities, Texas should not be subsidizing it.

Economic development matters, but growth at any cost is not a strategy. Texas should protect its residents and resources first.

Keywords: Economic development matters, but growth at any cost is not a strategy. Texas should protect its residents and resources first.

Texas needs to get much more serious about water. We have communities dealing with flooding, others worried about drought and falling groundwater levels, and still others where old pipes and outdated systems are wasting water that we cannot afford to lose.

Agriculture is a big part of this conversation, but I do not think farmers and ranchers should be treated like they are the problem. They are a huge part of the Texas economy, and many are already looking for ways to use water more efficiently. The state can help by making irrigation upgrades, conservation technology, and other water-saving practices more affordable and easier to access.

I would support putting more state funding into water and wastewater infrastructure, drainage, flood control, and repairing aging systems. We should also be doing more with water reuse and conservation instead of waiting until a community is in crisis before we act. I also do not think there is one statewide answer that works everywhere. Water needs in the Panhandle are different from what we see in Fort Bend County, and state policy needs to reflect that.

For me, the goal is pretty straightforward: stop wasting water, fix infrastructure before it breaks, keep our water clean, and work with farmers and ranchers to conserve without making it harder for them to make a living.

Keywords: For me, the goal is pretty straightforward: stop wasting water, fix infrastructure before it breaks, keep our water clean, and work with farmers and ranchers to conserve without making it harder for them to make a living.

Texas should not still be crossing its fingers every time we hit another heat wave. We know demand is growing, we know extreme weather puts more pressure on the grid, and we know data centers are adding even more strain. At some point, we have to stop acting surprised and start investing in the future that is already here.

I would support more investment in generation, transmission, and energy storage, while making it easier to bring new power sources online. I care less about which energy source gets the political credit and more about whether Texans can turn on the AC in August and know the power will stay on.

We also need to be exceedingly careful about who pays for new electricity demand. If a massive data center requires major grid upgrades or new components, homeowners and small businesses should not be stuck with the bill. The companies creating that demand should help pay for the infrastructure they require.

I also think Texas can do more to promote energy efficiency as part of the solution. Helping homes, schools, and businesses use less power during peak demand can reduce strain on the grid and lower costs at the same time. I don’t think anyone would argue with lower costs and a stronger grid.

Texans should be able to depend on the grid. Keeping the lights on during a Texas summer should not be treated like a victory. It should be the bare minimum.

Keywords: We know demand is growing, we know extreme weather puts more pressure on the grid, and we know data centers are adding even more strain. At some point, we have to stop acting surprised and start investing in the future that is already here.

Texas should not stand by while federal policy puts billions of dollars in research, jobs, and innovation at risk; doing so would be negligent and cost both research advancements and lives.

I would oppose arbitrary caps on NIH indirect costs that ignore what it actually takes to do research. Let’s be clear, labs do not run on grant money alone. Rather, institutions have to pay for facilities, equipment, compliance, utilities, and the staff who keep everything moving. Cutting that support does not make those costs disappear, but simply shifts the burden somewhere else.

At the state level, I would support strengthening Texas research funding so our universities and medical institutions are not completely at the mercy of Washington. CPRIT has already shown that Texas can make major investments in research and attract top scientists. We should build on that model where it makes sense. What I do not want is for Texas universities and hospitals to be forced to cut research, lay off staff, or walk away from promising work because of a sudden federal funding change.

This is bigger than academia. Research funding creates jobs, brings money into Texas, develops new treatments, and helps keep our state competitive. If we want Texas to lead in medicine, science, and innovation, then we have to protect the infrastructure that makes that work possible.

Keywords: Research funding creates jobs, brings money into Texas, develops new treatments, and helps keep our state competitive. If we want Texas to lead in medicine, science, and innovation, then we have to protect the infrastructure that makes that work possible.

I think the first step is listening and giving parents clear, factual answers without talking down to them. But we also cannot ignore what happened in Texas. Hundreds of measles cases and the deaths of two children are a reminder that this disease is serious and that falling vaccination rates have real consequences.

I would support stronger public health outreach, better access to vaccines, and more resources for local health departments to respond quickly when outbreaks happen. I also think the state should do more to support school-based vaccination clinics and partnerships with pediatricians, pharmacies, and community organizations so families can get reliable information and access vaccines without unnecessary barriers. I support school vaccination requirements and would be very cautious about expanding non-medical exemptions in ways that put others at risk.

For me, this is about trust, access, and responsibility. We should answer questions honestly, make accurate information easy to find, and keep protecting children from preventable disease.

Keywords: For me, this is about trust, access, and responsibility. We should answer questions honestly, make accurate information easy to find, and keep protecting children from preventable disease.

Facts matter. Experts matter. That does not mean every expert is always right, but it does mean policymakers should be looking at the weight of the evidence instead of cherry-picking whatever supports a political position.

When scientific claims conflict, I would look at where the evidence comes from, whether the findings have been replicated, who funded the research, and what happens if we get the decision wrong. We are not always going to have perfect information, but we still have to make decisions based on the best evidence available.

Public opinion matters, but it does not get to rewrite the facts. If the scientific consensus is clear and public opinion is somewhere else, the answer is not to ignore the science. The answer is to explain it better, be honest about what we know and what we do not, and listen to why people are skeptical.

I do not think policymaking should be driven by ideology first and evidence second. Start with the facts, ask tough questions, and change course when the evidence changes.

Keywords: I do not think policymaking should be driven by ideology first and evidence second.

House District 74 is on the frontlines of the New World Screwworm, and we saw this issue years before it arrived to Texas. I was deeply concerned with the federal governments approach to cutting funding for prevention of these type of infestations – and we are seeing the consequences. While I believe Texas’ academic institutions are well-equipped for these outbreaks, the federal government and U.S. Department of Agriculture should recognize the importance of mitigation rather than reaction.

Any approved data center, especially in House District 74, should be required to have a closed-loop system to preserve community water and have on-sight generation equipped to off-load dispatchable energy to ERCOT. Moreover, it is critical that rate-payers are in no way impacted by this increased load. Companies should have the responsibility to assist building up the communities they operate them – there should not be any tax-breaks for these companies.

I believe the state should be more involved with groundwater pumping, especially in regions that are not equipped with Groundwater Conservation Districts. No one should be able to use their wealth to deplete our community’s groundwater. Agriculture plays a critical part in Texas’ economy and in putting food on the table for all Texans, they should not be held responsible for any drought conditions we find ourselves in. Above all, I believe, now more than ever, that repurposing produced water through desalination would prove beneficial to communities across HD74.

Texas’ transmission capacity has been recognized as decades behind anticipated demand. We have taken critical step to weatherizing our grid and Texas will never escape harsh heat conditions. The ability to transmit energy, not only from, but to the Permian Basin, would further solidify our grid’s reliability.

I believe the Texas Legislature is too focused on niche-cultural issues that have little impact on the improvement on our research capacity, and deliberately leave out top-talent across the world and nation. The ability to attract talent to our institutions is paramount and the Legislature’s ability to adequately fund initiatives is of utmost importance.

I have always believed in vaccines and their efficacy. The federal government, in the current administration, has continued to undermine long-standing understandings and caused distrust among the public. While we are proud to always partner with local clinics and hospitals across HD74, I believe it is incumbent upon our federal leaders to set the example and not feed into extremes of our society to further incite distrust between health officials and those they swore to protect.

Scientific research and studies should be a driving factor in policy, which helps us understand the facts at face-value. When I consider legislation in the Texas House related to public health, my first inclination is to always seek advice from professionals in the field. No Legislator can pretend to fully comprehend these details without the advice of professionals in their respective fields.

I would want to see data not just from USDA but from trades/agricultural organizations. I think data from neighboring governments would be a useful datapoint to help determine proactive plans. Texas must step up now to curb the spread of NW Screwworm but the largest impact would come from the State teaming up with other affected state to lobby the federal government for the level of resources needed to halt the spread and prevent future outbreaks. The data will tell the story of how we got here and how to prevent it from happening again.

Texas needs to stop being a cheap date for large corporations. Data centers do not have to be the resource suck they are currently. There is technology that can save water, they can invest directly into clean energy production and energy transmission infrastructure. I support a moratorium on Data Centers until the full impact is understood and any incentives to build Data Centers includes the mitigation of the negative impacts on our environment, energy infrastructure, and Texans quality of life.

The subsidizing of Agriculture was supposed to produce high quality low cost food domestically. But we have high food costs and over abundance of processed foods. We need to change the incentive structure to allow for Agriculture to produce quality food that works within the environment that it is grown. Sustainable farming and local farming can reduce water consumption grown quality foods closer to people. Farmers that practice this type of farming should be subsidized more than large corporate farms. We need both in operation but sustainable agriculture has impact beyond crop yields that benefit our society.

An energy policy of ALL THE ABOVE. Texas is a leader in renewable energy but some still see it as a threat to fossil fuels. Texas is a leader in energy, full stop. We should embrace that mantle and lead in new energy; nuclear, solar, geo-thermal, wind and battery storage. But we cannot invest in energy production and export it through a frail grid, we must expand our grid and connect to other large grids to sell and import power.

We have amazing Tier 1 institutions that are creating the future world we will be living in. I fear the pressure from the President of the United States is chilling the academic freedom that makes our schools so productive and invocative. The “social monitoring” of academics and the threat of federal defunding of our universities will drive talent away from Texas Schools. Where schools thrive we see economic growth. Texas was seeing that growth in Austin, Dallas, and Houston because of the proximity to amazing institutions of higher learning. Texas State government must stand up to the Federal overreach to protect our university’s ability to innovate in science, engineering, literature, and medicine.

Our state was ground zero for the impact of vaccine skepticism. We felt the real life impact of the politization of science. Texas must stand up for the health of it’s people and put aside the politization of important medical information and proven science.

With the increased influence of social media in our society, we must all step back and remember the scientific method we were taught as children. Our emotions far to often are leading policy decisions, not data and research. There has been an erosion of respect for expertise and fact that may contradict options. Fortifying our education system will help future generations but the immediate need is for civic and political leaders to govern by emotion instead of data and facts.

This is a multi-prong approach. First we would have to stop the import of cattle from infected areas. Release sterile flies along the frontline areas. Inoculate the cattle with anti parasitic medications. Make sure there is funding to support these efforts.

Keywords: Stop the import. Release sterile flies. Anti-parasitic medication. Funding

These centers would have to have their own recycled water source. They would have to have their own power source. Currently the refineries have their own power source . If the data centers have extra power more than what they need it could be put back into the grid.

Keywords: Recycled water source. Refineries have their own power. Extra power put back into the grid.

There is a water distribution system set up. Basically, a water grid tied from the wetter areas of the state to feed into the drier areas of the state. It is currently being built. Irrigation is the most immediate and important factor for the state’s agricultural economy. If we can master the water distribution and maintenance, then it would help solve a lot of problems. Funding would also be needed to build and upkeep the water distribution system.

Keywords: Water distribution system. Irrigation. Funding

The new power generation system currently being developed would be able to help supply more power to the grid. There was an approval for 765 KV transmission lines to upgrade the states overloaded power grid and to prevent blackouts. This slows it to carry a lot more power. The state is also developing geothermal energy.

Keywords: New power generation system. 765 KV transmission lines. Geothermal energy.

Help facilitate private corporate grants to fill the gap. This research is ongoing and necessary because it is done in the interest of health.

Keywords: Private corporate grants.

We would have to inform local communities and schools about the health risks of the disease and the requirements for vaccination. Ensure that there is proper resources to supply vaccines and maybe get funding for free vaccinations.

Keywords: Inform and funding

Scientific evidence and expert input has a very important role when making policies. It is important to research, evaluate and hear all sides of the claims. It will take multiple steps as well as several opinions when evaluating scientific data , research and public opinion.

Keywords: Research, evaluate, listen. Multiple steps and sources.

I would follow the advice of biologist and agriculture scientists to take all necessary steps to protect our food supply. There is no reason that a parasite that was once eradicated cannot be defeated again.

I would support no tax incentives for data centers. Corporations and billionaires are destroying water, agriculture land, existing animal populations, and polluting our state. In fact, I’d call for a moratorium on building new data centers.

We need public-private partnerships with agriculturists. Working with all different fields of science, we can recharge aquifers that are being drained at an alarming rate. Also, we would work to find crops and engineer seeds that are better suited to arid land. Furthermore, stopping data centers will help with water consumption.

I would work to bring more renewable energy resources to our grid. Renewable energy is extremely efficient, and at this point, nobody can deny that climate change is harming our state.

Healthcare and education are two of the most important issues of this campaign. I also know that education is the top factor for social mobility. I will work to fully fund research for our universities. Texas universities have some of the best research facilities, if funding is diminished, generations of knowledge will be wasted.

Vaccines efficacy and safety need to be brought to the attention of the public. Ad campaigns and PSAs need to be in public places in English and Spanish. In 2026, people should trust science and medicine instead of anecdotal claims social media.

Scientific consensus and public opinion are areas where ideas diverge based on ideology. This shouldn’t happen. I will listen to advice of science and make decisions based on evidence instead of personal ideology.

Ambiguous claims will need close evaluation. I will make evidence-based decisions. We will carefully evaluate statistics and weigh in the thoughts of constituents.

In the 1960s the screw-fly problem was solved by breading screw-flies and irradiating the newly bread flies which caused the male flies to become infertile. This had zero negative impact of livestock or the environment at large. These infertile flies were released to mate with the female and the population of screw flies dropped to zero.

Water has always been a major issue in Texas and it always will be. With regard to data centers’ use of water, zoning laws requiring that the data centers recapture the condensation of water from their cooling systems. As for electricity usage, I would like to say that wind and solar could supply the need, but that simply is not the case. However, there is an alternative power generation technology that can be employed. It is an orphaned technology known as Molten Salt Thorium Reactors. Oak Ridge National Laboratory built and successfully operated the first one in the world for a number of years. But because the reactor could not produce fissile bomb material, the project was canceled.

What was learned was that the Thorium reactor was safer than uranium-fueled reactors.

There are literally hundreds of thousands of oil and gas wells that have been drilled in Texas and all of them pass through the brine layer. This brine layer has lower salinity than sea water and therefore more economical for reverse osmosis desalination projects. There have been teat wells proving the viability of this method at A&M Corpus Christi and by SAWS. A program establishing desalination plants from the brine water is a potential solution to the pending water problem. These plants should be first established on state owned lands to avoid water rights issues.

There are two facets to this problem and both must be addressed. First and foremost an emergency contingency plan must be established by coordination port facilities and railroad companies. In an emergency (such and happened in 2021) it could be possible to connect diesel electric locomotives and ships in the harbor to the grid to provide power to critical infrastructure such as hospitals, water utilities, police and fire departments. This would require cooperation with both public and privet sector stakeholders and emergency funding to pay for the implementation.

The second facet is the long-term solution. New power generation plants need to be built preferably employing Thorium reactors as mentioned above. These newer power plants must incorporate EMP mitigation technology such that a natural EMP, or a man-made EMP. will not kill the grid.

Currently the types of state funding that are awarded to academia and private sector is controlled by a few academicians in College Station. The vast majority of funding goes to medical research. This system ignore other equally deserving proposals that are not in the medical field but in energy and technology. The state need to work more closely with the Army’s Future Command and so that a broad range of emerging technologies are developed which can ultimately be brought to market by the private sector.

If COVID taught us anything it is that panic is a poor policy. It was astonishing to me that masks were mandated yet the highly effective pathogen killing UV-C lighting in ventilation systems to in schools or malls are completely ignored. Had this been a policy the spread of the disease would have been greatly reduced. That being said, childhood vaccines need to be re-examined for safety. The fact that Mercury is used in vaccines as a preservative is unacceptable and must be stopped. There are alternative preservatives that DO NOT affect the central nervous system the way that Mercury has been shown to do. The question is this a state or federal issue.

Science in its purest form is a great tool for civilization. However, over the past several decades science has become agenda driven as the Climate Gate leaked e-mails proved and the recent revelations of Dr. Fauci’s diary. So, in developing policy all views on a scientific issue must be heard and weighed for merit. Silencing one side is not good policy nor is it good science. In science we should work from the known to the unknown, from the simple to the complex and always twist the theory to fit the facts – not the other way around.

While state agencies are considered adequately funded to manage a response, federal budget cuts in 2025 weakened early detection and response in part due to closures of field sites. I would support evaluating the creation of a permanent fund for Texas biosecurity. Texas, in particular as a border state, needs to be able to finance prevention and rapid response of state agencies without waiting on the federal response. Some key elements to be included in a permanent fund could include supporting vehicle wash stations at major ports of entry, establishing permanent bio surveillance checkpoints and creating programs to incentivize private landowner surveillance. This approach is informed by TAHC/TDEM. TPWD, USDA as well as data gathered in partnerships from our universities.

Keywords: Texas biosecurity, checkpoints, surveillance

AI data centers are quintessential to national security. While the US currently maintains a dominant lead in cluster capacity, China has overcome the electron gap. Texas is uniquely poised with our central national location and areas in the state that are free from natural disaster risks. However, it is incumbent upon us to solve the power crisis to be able to generate and store power adjacent to data centers. There is interest in next generation nuclear power generation. As a physician and electrical engineer, I have concerns about safety, integrity and oversight of these proposed solutions and hope to see proposals for lower risk alternatives. Water is a critical resource. Policy for promoting data centers needs to include closed loop, direct chip cooling and greywater. Some of our nation’s leading AI experts postulate that if we couple AI with scientific innovation we have the ability to engineer new solutions not yet in existence. The Governor’s technology portfolio has 3 core programs that could be directed to incentivize and capture this opportunity/challenge. This approach is informed by technology publications, symposiums, and government defense experts.

Keywords: Electron gap, closed loop, direct chip cooling

In my view, the defining victory of the 89th legislature was the creation of the state’s first-ever constitutionally dedicated water funding mechanism—later approved by Texas voters as Proposition 4, which I campaigned locally in favor of. In the 90th session we will need to move from capital allocation to long-term planning and resource protection. We also need to resolve the battle between tech and agriculture. Many of our rural communities are dealing with antiquated infrastructure and lack of engineering staff. My husband and I feel like we are doing our part in recently graduating one in environmental science while our younger finishes a degree in chemical engineering. Unfortunately, I believe that cities like Austin contribute to the problem. I observed first hand while serving on the Planning Commission how hard our engineers in the water-shed work only to see their recommendations tossed by political movements that fail to consider the importance of infrastructure to the city and other downstream users. While the last leg created a possible framework for water sharing, there is much to be done.

In my opinion, this question is closely tied to question 2. To expand on policies specific to demand and extreme heat, I believe that Texas needs to adopt policies that promote integrating green spaces and cooling corridors. The Texas legislature previously passed legislation that strips municipalities and counties of authority to require aspects of development to incorporate measures critical to environmental resilience. I believe this type of legislation is short-sighted. I would seek legislative partners in the House and the Senate to bring forward measures to establish the creation of a commission that focuses on environmental resilience and stewardship. I grew up in Houston and lived through Tropical Storm Claudette which delivered 43 inches of rainfall in 24 hours. My family was rescued off the roof in the middle of the night. Last summer’s Kerrville disaster served as a traumatic reminder of what weather extremes in Texas can do. The variations in extreme heat are coupled with variations in water weather patterns and these need to be addressed holistically.

I will not support an H1B visa ban without thorough evaluation. I will educate other members of the legislature on the positive impacts that H1B visas have in keeping Texas and Texas research and technology on the forefront nationally and internationally. Further, I will help to inform members of the legislature on the positive economic and financial impacts that H1B visa holders have directly for our state. As a physician and engineer, I will use my platform to advocate for the restoration of federal programs and funding while looking for opportunities to bring other funding sources to our state.

An important component of the Medical Jurisprudence for medical licensure in the state of Texas (license in good standing since initial licensure 1990’s) requires an understanding of the distinctions between informed consent and medical assault and battery. I have always been passionate about my role and responsibility as a physician to educate. While I was in medical school at Parkland, I was elected to our outreach to the Dallas school district in which we presented a curriculum on sexually transmitted diseases to students. Our curriculum had to be submitted to the school board for approval annually. I then coordinated medical student volunteers with requesting schools for scheduling programs. I personally presented to auditoriums of students ages 13-18. Later, when I was in active practice, the HPV vaccine was first rolled out. As a medical community we were ecstatic to have a cancer prevention vaccine that was embraced by then Governor Rick Perry. Unfortunately, the mandates and the initial release which was to young women only back-fired. In exam rooms and with mothers/patients, I had to explain why the HPV vaccine was a cancer preventing measure. I learned a tremendous amount in my role as a physician and public educator through that experience. It helped me tremendously in the recent pandemic and roll out of the Covid vaccine. I believe as one of only a handful of physicians serving in the Texas legislature that I will have an important role in helping legislators create policy that is informed by science while respecting personal autonomy.

I have always been one who does not accept formulaic answers. I strive to understand more deeply and completely. I am curious by nature. My approach to evaluating competing or uncertain claims is to pursue a more comprehensive understanding by reading, asking questions and learning from subject matter experts. As a former President of our neighborhood HOA, I have also learned how to help parties reconcile differences or compromise on solutions.

I would support an aggressive, science-based, producer-focused response that treats New World screwworm as both an agricultural and economic-security threat.

My policy would be grow the technology economy, protect the grid, protect our water supply, and make sure the companies creating the demand pay the infrastructure costs they create, not Texan families.

I support a long-term, conservation-focused water strategy that increases supply while protecting Texas agriculture and private property rights. First prioritize infrastructure, Texas should continue to invest in reservoirs, pipelines, wastewater treatment. Most importantly I would expand incentives for cities, utilities, farmers, and ranchers to repair leaks, modernize irrigation, reuse water, and improve efficiency.

Texas needs a diverse power mix, including natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind, and battery storage. I support policies that encourage investment in dependable generation rather than relying on a single technology. ERCOT currently expects roughly 8,800 MW of new gas-fired generation by the end of 2029, supported in part by the Texas Energy Fund.

Texas should remain a national leader in medical and scientific research, but we should pursue that goal with fiscal discipline, transparency, competitive research funding, and strong partnerships between universities, hospitals, government, and the private sector

I believe Texans can protect public health while respecting parental rights and individual liberty. The recent measles outbreak shows that infectious diseases can have serious consequences, but the answer should be education, transparency, accessibility, and responsible policy, not fear or unnecessary government mandates.

As a Republican, I believe good policy starts with facts, transparency, and accountability. Whether the issue involves public health, energy, agriculture, water, or the environment, I would want to understand the best available evidence, hear from qualified experts, and consider the potential economic and practical consequences before supporting legislation.

I support an aggressive, science-based response coordinated among the Texas Animal Health Commission, USDA, veterinarians, wildlife officials, and livestock producers. Texas should provide emergency resources for rapid testing, surveillance, producer education, animal treatment, and targeted assistance for ranchers complying with quarantine or movement restrictions.

The response should prioritize the sterile insect technique, which successfully eradicated screwworm from the United States in the 1960s and controlled the 2016 Florida Keys outbreak. In Texas, we should also strengthen border inspection, livestock-movement tracking, veterinary laboratory capacity, and mandatory reporting of suspected cases.

Any quarantine should be geographically targeted, regularly reviewed, and lifted promptly when surveillance data demonstrate that it is no longer necessary. This considers the balance between animal health without unnecessarily disrupting commerce or private property rights.

Early containment is therefore both a biosecurity necessity and a fiscally responsible investment.

Texas should welcome data-center investment, but these projects must pay their own way. I would not support policies that shift transmission, generation, water-infrastructure, or reliability costs onto homeowners and existing businesses.

I would support:

• Requiring large-load applicants to demonstrate financial commitment, credible construction timelines, and available generation before receiving grid approval.
• Assigning project-specific transmission and utility-upgrade costs to the developments creating them.
• Requiring operational flexibility during grid emergencies, including demand reduction or on-site backup generation.
• Requiring water-impact disclosures and locally approved water-supply plans, with strong incentives for recycled water, closed-loop cooling, and lower-water technologies.
• Conditioning tax incentives on measurable capital investment, permanent Texas jobs, infrastructure commitments, and enforceable clawbacks.
• Preserving local authority over land use, noise, water availability, and effects on neighboring property.

I support responsible growth. ERCOT was tracking approximately 474 gigawatts of large-load requests as of June 2026, roughly 90 percent associated with data centers, although many proposed projects may never be built. The Texas Water Development Board also warns that statewide water totals can conceal substantial impacts in water-stressed communities. Those facts support project-specific review rather than either unchecked incentives. Texas can lead the digital economy without compromising grid reliability, water security, private property, or affordable utility service.

Texas must address flooding, drought, water quality, and aging infrastructure as parts of the same water-security challenge. I support fully and transparently implementing the voter-approved Texas Water Fund.

Investments should include:

• Repairing leaking municipal systems and aging wastewater infrastructure.
• Expanding reservoirs, aquifer storage and recharge, desalination, water reuse, and floodwater capture.
• Improving drainage and flood-control infrastructure based on watershed-level risk.
• Strengthening water-quality monitoring and enforcing existing pollution laws against identified sources.
• Helping rural communities replace failing wastewater and septic systems.
• Expanding voluntary agricultural conservation grants for precision irrigation, soil-moisture technology, canal improvements, and other proven practices.

Agriculture must be treated as a partner, not merely as a target for restrictions. Farmers and ranchers protect our food supply, sustain rural economies, and frequently have the greatest opportunity to produce measurable conservation savings.

This approach would protect private property rights, existing water rights, and local groundwater-district authority while tying public funding to verified water savings and measurable outcomes. Decisions should be guided by regional conditions, aquifer science, drought projections, water-quality data, and the economic consequences for agricultural producers and rural communities. Texas should conserve more water without regulating productive farmland out of existence.

Texas needs an all-of-the-above reliability strategy that adds dependable generation while protecting consumers from unnecessary costs. Major projects should require legislative approval and oversight.

I would support:

• Accelerating new dispatchable generation, including natural gas and nuclear power, while retaining competitive renewable and battery resources.
• Expanding transmission where demonstrated demand and congestion justify the cost.
• Continuing enforceable weatherization and fuel-supply requirements for generators and critical natural-gas infrastructure.
• Requiring large industrial loads, particularly data centers, to demonstrate credible demand, pay the infrastructure costs they create, and reduce consumption during declared grid emergencies.
• Strengthening cybersecurity and physical security for generation, substations, pipelines, and control systems.
• Improving ERCOT forecasting so speculative projects are not treated the same as financially committed developments.

ERCOT’s preliminary forecast shows extraordinary potential demand growth through 2032, driven largely by large industrial loads. That requires disciplined planning, but it should not become an excuse for blank-check spending. Reliability investments should be based on verified demand, measurable performance, and the ability to produce power during extreme heat, extreme cold, and periods of low renewable output. Texas consumers should not be asked to conserve while extraordinarily large new users avoid responsibility for the costs they impose.

Texas should protect productive biomedical research without writing a blank check for institutional overhead.

I would support:

• Continued federal use of audited, negotiated indirect-cost rates rather than an abrupt, one-size-fits-all cap.
• Stronger disclosure of how indirect-cost reimbursements are calculated and spent.
• Regular federal audits, benchmarking among comparable institutions, and limits on unrelated administrative expenses.
• Advance notice and a reasonable transition period for any lawful reimbursement reforms.
• Targeted state matching funds for research involving cancer, neurological disease, maternal health, infectious disease, biotechnology, and other strategic Texas priorities.
• Expanded partnerships with private industry and stronger commercialization pathways so successful discoveries generate jobs, investment, and intellectual property in Texas.

I would not support automatically replacing every lost federal dollar with state taxpayer money. Universities, particularly institutions with substantial endowments, should demonstrate cost control and share responsibility for administrative expenses. However, laboratories, patient-safety systems, specialized equipment, data security, and regulatory compliance are legitimate research costs. Abruptly eliminating their support could drive researchers and investment out of Texas.

Taxpayers deserve transparency and efficiency, while Texas patients and businesses benefit from a research system capable of producing medical discoveries, clinical trials, skilled jobs, and new companies.

The fallout from the 2020 pandemic has eroded public trust with the medical community and government. Public trust cannot be restored through ridicule, censorship, or coercion. State officials should communicate plainly about both disease risks and vaccine safety, acknowledge legitimate questions, publish timely data, and work through local physicians, pharmacists, schools, churches, and community leaders.

I would support:

• Preserving informed consent, parental rights, and Texas’s existing vaccine exemptions.
• Ensuring families can voluntarily obtain recommended vaccines through physicians, pharmacies, and local health departments.
• Providing clear information about vaccine benefits, known risks, contraindications, and adverse-event reporting.
• Strengthening disease surveillance, laboratory capacity, rapid case reporting, contact tracing, and outbreak-response coordination.
• Allowing targeted, temporary exclusion or isolation measures for confirmed cases and high-risk exposures during an active outbreak, based on medical evidence and due process.
• Requiring transparency regarding vaccine-safety monitoring, adverse events, state contracts, and public-health recommendations. Government should present evidence honestly while respecting the physician-patient relationship and parents’ responsibility for their children. The goal should be informed cooperation, not a one-size-fits-all mandate that further undermines public confidence.

Scientific evidence and expert input should inform policymaking, but they should not replace constitutional judgment, public accountability, or common sense. Science can estimate risks and likely outcomes. Elected officials must also consider individual liberty, economic costs, feasibility, unintended consequences, and the proper limits of government.

When claims compete, I would examine:

• The quality and design of the underlying studies.
• Sample size, replication, effect size, and real-world relevance.
• Whether data and methods are transparent.
• Conflicts of interest and funding sources.
• Whether conclusions exceed what the evidence actually demonstrates.
• The consequences of acting, delaying, or being wrong.
• Input from practitioners and affected communities, not only institutional experts.

Scientific consensus deserves serious weight, but consensus is not infallible and should never be used to end legitimate inquiry. Public opinion cannot change biological or physical facts, but it can reveal practical concerns, value judgments, and failures of public trust.

Good policy follows the evidence while remaining humble enough to change when better evidence emerges.

Texas must respond to New World screwworm with the urgency of an emergency, with science-based discipline, and with adequate resourcing. I would support emergency state funding for the Texas Animal Health Commission, veterinary diagnostic capacity, trapping and surveillance, rapid-response teams, and coordination with USDA, local governments, veterinarians, livestock producers, wildlife officials, and Mexico. Texas should also make reporting easy and financially realistic for producers. We also know screwworm can infect pets and wildlife, the state should provide veterinarians, shelters, animal-control agencies, hunters, pet owners, and rural communities with clear information about wound inspection, symptoms, reporting, and prevention. In San Antonio and HD 125, that means bilingual public education and coordination with shelters and veterinary providers. My approach would be guided by USDA and Texas Animal Health Commission surveillance data, veterinary and entomological expertise, outbreak modeling, the experience of the successful U.S. eradication program, and continuous evaluation of which interventions are actually reducing transmission.

I believe technological growth and innovation should be responsible and reflective of the needs and aspirations of that specific community. And it should pay its own way. That is especially important in San Antonio and HD 125. Our region depends heavily on the Edwards Aquifer and has repeatedly experienced drought restrictions. We must look at actual water availability, not simply the size of the investment being proposed. I would support mandatory disclosure of projected and actual water and electricity use; water-impact assessments in water-stressed regions; conservation and recycling requirements; regulations for reclaimed or non-potable water and closed-loop or low-water cooling systems; and stronger consideration of cumulative impacts when multiple facilities are proposed in the same watershed or utility territory. The same principle applies to electricity. I believe large-load customers should bear appropriate interconnection costs so families and small businesses are not left paying for infrastructure for these data centers. I would also support reliability requirements and compensated demand-response agreements to reduce consumption during genuine grid emergencies. Lastly, public incentives should be tied to measurable public benefits: permanent Texas jobs, wages and benefits, local hiring, infrastructure contributions, water efficiency, grid reliability, and transparent economic returns. A multibillion-dollar project that creates relatively few permanent jobs while increasing utility or infrastructure costs for its neighbors should not automatically receive a taxpayer subsidy simply because it involves cutting-edge technology.

I would support sustained state investment in drinking-water and wastewater systems, replacement of leaking and aging infrastructure, flood-control projects, aquifer recharge and conservation, rural water systems, watershed restoration, and projects identified through Texas’s state water and flood planning processes. For San Antonio and HD 125, protecting the Edwards Aquifer must remain a priority. I would support strong groundwater science, monitoring and enforcement, conservation during drought, greater use of reclaimed water, infrastructure that reduces water loss, and appropriate requirements for exceptionally large new industrial users. Alongside drainage and flood-control infrastructure, I support nature-based solutions such as preserving or restoring floodplains, watersheds, and wetlands, and expanding appropriate tree canopy and green infrastructure. These investments can provide flood protection while improving water quality, reducing heat, and creating community amenities.

As a public school teacher in San Antonio during winter storm Uri, my students and families know that during extreme heat or cold, reliable electricity can be a matter of life and death. No Texas family should not have to choose between affordable electricity and a dependable grid. I support an all-of-the-above reliability strategy based on performance and evidence, rather than favoring one technology for political reasons. Texas should maintain their generation while continuing to take advantage of our enormous wind and solar resources, rapidly expanding battery storage, modernizing transmission, improving energy efficiency, and deploying distributed resources such as rooftop solar, batteries, and microgrids. I will support investments in energy-efficiency programs, weatherization, smart demand response, and voluntary programs that compensate homes and businesses for reducing load. Lastly, I will oppose policies that solve industrial growth by simply shifting costs onto residential customers. Reliability investments should provide transparent cost-benefit analysis, and consumers should have a meaningful voice at the Public Utility Commission.

At the federal level, I would urge Texas’s congressional delegation to maintain robust, predictable NIH and other federal science funding; preserve a transparent process for determining legitimate indirect costs; and resist abrupt funding changes that disrupt multiyear research. At the state level, I believe, Texas should sustain and strengthen its position as a national research leader. I would support competitive state research investments, matching funds that help institutions win federal grants, shared research infrastructure, commercialization and technology-transfer initiatives, graduate and postdoctoral training, and targeted bridge mechanisms. I would also support accountability for public research dollars which should be accompanied by transparent financial standards, rigorous peer review, conflict-of-interest protections, and evaluation of outcomes.

Texas’s 2025 measles outbreak demonstrated the stakes. As a teacher during the COVID-19 pandemic and the parent to a current Kindergartner with asthma, I support making accurate information and vaccination easier to access. Texas must adequately fund DSHS and local public-health departments for disease surveillance, laboratory capacity, outbreak response, vaccination clinics, and rapid communication. I support evidence-based school immunization requirements and medical exemptions when clinically appropriate. I would oppose weakening those requirements in ways that create avoidable risks for children who cannot be vaccinated or who are especially vulnerable to infection. Lastly, I believe that during outbreaks, state and local officials should follow epidemiological evidence regarding testing, isolation, exposure notifications, vaccination campaigns and other interventions.

Scientific evidence should be a foundational part of policymaking whenever a policy depends on factual questions about health, energy, agriculture, infrastructure, the environment, or technology. Science cannot decide every question for elected officials because policymaking also requires judgments about values, costs, fairness, and competing priorities. But elected officials should not invent their own facts. I will continue to seek input from researchers with relevant expertise; universities and public research institutions; state technical agencies; practitioners working in the field; affected communities; and, when appropriate, independent scientific organizations. The answer to a divide between evidence and public opinion is not to discard either the public or the evidence. It is to communicate more clearly, disclose uncertainties and tradeoffs, invite meaningful public participation, and make decisions grounded in the strongest evidence available. Good government asks hard questions, follows the evidence wherever it leads, and changes course when better evidence proves us wrong.

We must incentivize ranchers to report screwworm in their own livestock. As it is now, ranchers who do the right thing are risking their livelihoods, while the ones who choose not to report stay in business and endanger the public. As the question mentions, we haven’t had this problem in decades. I consider myself a progressive in many ways, but on this particular issue, we need to go back to what we were doing before. We had a sophisticated program in place that controlled the screwworm population, but our leaders cut that program because they didn’t understand the threat. Let’s not make the same mistake again. We must trust the experts and fully evaluate programs before cuts are made.

Keywords: We must incentivize ranchers to report screwworm in their own livestock.

I am fully against data centers in Texas because I hear the outcry from our local communities. The working people of this state have been exploited by multibillion dollar corporations for decades. Data centers are just another instance of large corporations siphoning our resources as our leaders invite them to screw us over. Data centers may create construction jobs temporarily, but they are not job creators in the long run. My campaign is all about fighting for the working class because I believe an economy is best built from the bottom up, and our local communities need fighters more than ever. As State Representative, I will fight to end Governor Abbott’s tax breaks because I am tired of footing the bill for multibillion dollar corporations.

Keywords: I am fully against data centers in Texas because I hear the outcry from our local communities.

I am in favor of establishing a statewide “water grid” so local communities like Corpus Christi do not bear the brunt of this crisis. I also support desalination where it makes sense for the local community. While I hear desalination doesn’t work everywhere, converting saltwater to freshwater is powerful technology that I hope will one day ensure a future-proof supply. As it is now, Texas is heavily reliant on aquifers, which will run dry soon with current climate projections.

Keywords: Statewide “water grid” and desalination where it makes sense

I recall reading stories of the elderly being trapped in senior living facilities with nowhere to go as they froze to death. Not only do we need to address increasing demand, we need to ensure the tragedies we saw during winter storm Uri do not happen again. Step one is to invest in weatherizing the grid against extreme heat and cold. I also support connecting to the national grid, as it is in our safety and economic interest. During times of crisis, we would be able to get the help we need from other states. Meanwhile, during normal operating conditions, Texas would be making money by selling our power nationwide. Lastly, we need to continue making progress in the adoption of renewable energy as we decrease our reliance on fossil fuels.

Keywords: Connect to the national grid

I am running for a state office, which does not have the power to determine the level of NIH funding. But with that said, there are ways we can address this problem on a state level that can make up for NIH shortcomings. Texas can enter its own partnerships with NIH, where both parties can negotiate and agree where we should pitch in. Personally, I see a need for stable careers for working people my age. If NIH is skeptical about funding, I would advocate that they invest in scholarships, internships, and pipeline programs.

Keywords: NIH should be investing in scholarships, internships, and pipeline programs.

When it comes to diseases and outbreaks, we are all in this together, and our leaders need to govern as such. Right now, the negligent actions of a handful of individuals are putting us all at risk. The measles vaccine has been proven safe and effective over decades, and is well worthy of being a required vaccination for kids entering elementary school.

Keywords: The measles vaccine has been proven safe and effective over decades, and is well worthy of being a required vaccination for kids entering elementary school.

When in doubt, follow the money. I find that understanding the financial stakeholders to any given policy decision will always reveal ulterior motives. If we are to trust any experts, it should be the ones with lifelong careers in public service without conflicts of interest.

Keywords: When in doubt, follow the money.

I would support a strong partnership between Texas, USDA, veterinarians, and local producers that focuses on early detection, rapid testing, sterile fly releases, and stopping infected animals from moving the pest into new areas. Texas should also make sure rural veterinarians, livestock owners, county extension offices, and wildlife officials have the funding and training they need to recognize and report cases quickly, because biosecurity only works when the people on the ground can actually use it. I would look closely at the science coming from USDA and our agricultural universities, but I would also listen to ranchers and producers who understand what is practical in West Texas and what would create unnecessary costs without improving disease control. Protecting agriculture means treating prevention as an investment, because waiting until an outbreak is widespread will cost producers, taxpayers, and rural communities far more.

Keywords: Good agricultural policy starts with good science, but it has to work at the ranch gate too.

I support economic development, including data centers, but growth cannot come at the expense of the communities that already call Texas home. I would require meaningful water impact studies, protect residential and agricultural water needs, and make sure data centers pay the infrastructure and utility costs created by their demand rather than shifting those costs onto families and small businesses. I also believe counties need stronger negotiating power when these projects are proposed, including the ability to require agreements that protect roads, water, fire departments, EMS, and other local services, with large facilities contributing directly to the first responders who will be expected to serve them. Finally, I support reforming tax incentives and exploring a state and local tax structure tied to the enormous amount of data these facilities process or transfer, so that as this industry grows, some of that value is returned to the communities providing the land, water, energy, and infrastructure that make that growth possible.

Keywords: Texas can welcome new technology without handing it a blank check written on our water supply, electric bills, and rural communities.

Texas water policy should start with protecting the people who feed us and the rural communities built around agriculture. I would invest in repairing aging water infrastructure, expanding water reuse, and studying where Texas can better capture excess water during major rain and flood events and store or move it to areas that need it, including through reservoirs and aquifer recharge where the science supports it. We should also help farmers and ranchers access technology and infrastructure that protect their water supply and keep their operations productive, while making sure new industrial development does not threaten existing agricultural or residential water sources. Texas is going to experience both drought and flooding, and our long term water strategy should be built around capturing more of the water we receive, protecting its quality, and working with farmers, ranchers, groundwater districts, and local communities to determine what works in each region.

Keywords: In Texas, we can have too much water in one place and not enough in another. Our infrastructure should be smart enough to prepare for both.

Texas needs a reliable electric grid that can support our homes, businesses, agriculture, and continued growth, and that will require investment in generation, storage, and transmission. I am not opposed to infrastructure such as 765 kV transmission lines when the evidence shows they are necessary, but I strongly believe Texas needs a better process for deciding where they go, with earlier community involvement, stronger protections for landowners, and meaningful consideration of existing homes, farms, ranches, and property values. We also need to make sure the largest new energy users pay their fair share of the infrastructure their demand requires and can reduce their demand during grid emergencies before families are asked to conserve or face outages. Grid reliability should be about planning ahead, diversifying our energy resources, and building what Texas actually needs without asking rural communities or residential ratepayers to carry an unfair share of the cost.

Keywords: We can build the grid Texas needs without treating rural Texas like an empty space on a map.

I am not knowledgeable enough to make a comment on this topic. What I can say is that I think we need to listen to experts that are in those fields and actually hear them when they tell us some things work and some do not.

Parents deserve accurate information about vaccines and infectious diseases from medical professionals they trust, not to be left searching Google or social media and trying to determine what is true on their own. I would support better training and resources for pediatricians and OBGYN providers to have real, individual conversations with families during pregnancy and throughout a child’s early years about how vaccines work, their benefits, possible risks, and the diseases they prevent. That means making time for questions and concerns in the exam room rather than simply handing parents a brochure or dismissing them when they are uncertain. When outbreaks occur, public health agencies should communicate clearly and transparently about what we know, what we do not know, and what families can do to protect themselves, because trust is built through honest conversations, not fear or shame.

Keywords: Parents should not have to choose between a pamphlet and Google when they have questions about their child’s health.

When I taught science, one of the most important lessons was that science is not about having all the answers. It is about asking questions, testing what we think we know, and being willing to change our conclusions when the evidence changes. Scientific evidence and expert input should play a major role in policymaking, especially when we have enough reliable data to make decisions that affect people’s health, livelihoods, water, energy, and communities, but science should inform those decisions alongside the experiences and needs of the people who will live with them. When scientific claims compete or remain uncertain, I would look at the quality and amount of evidence, whether findings have been independently supported, and where the broader scientific consensus stands while continuing to listen to legitimate questions and new information. Public opinion deserves to be heard, but when strong scientific evidence conflicts with popular opinion, I believe leaders have a responsibility to explain the evidence, listen to people’s concerns, and make the best decision we can with the information available while always being willing to revisit that policy as the science and circumstances change.

Keywords: Good policy should be strong enough to follow the evidence and flexible enough to change when the evidence does.

I support aggressive, science-based eradication of the New World screwworm outbreak and stronger long-term agricultural biosecurity for Texas.

The June 2026 detections in South Texas, now totaling dozens of confirmed cases, threaten our livestock industry and regional economy. A full-scale outbreak on the scale of 1976 could cost producers hundreds of millions and the Texas economy well over a billion dollars. Protecting cattle, sheep, goats, and the producers who raise them is a core Texas interest.

I support full continuation of the USDA–TAHC response centered on the sterile insect technique—the same proven method that previously eradicated this pest from the United States. That includes rapid sterile-fly releases, targeted quarantines and movement controls in defined zones, intensified surveillance, and practical support for producers to prevent and treat wounds.

I also support accelerating domestic sterile-fly production capacity in Texas, maintaining strong livestock import inspections and border surveillance, and ensuring producers have workable pathways to move healthy animals. Requirements should be time-limited, results-driven, and free of unnecessary bureaucracy.

The evidence is clear: sterile insect technique works, delay is expensive, and prevention at the border is cheaper than cleanup after the fact. Texas agriculture deserves decisive action and accountability, not half-measures.

I do not support special tax incentives or preferential treatment that shift costs onto Texas families and businesses for data center development.

Data centers consume large amounts of land, water, and electricity while creating relatively few permanent local jobs once construction ends. ERCOT has more than doubled its 2030 forecast for data-center power demand in a single year. That surge stresses the grid and risks higher utility costs for residential and small-business customers. Water use is also substantial in a state already managing drought and growth pressures. Tax exemptions for these facilities have grown into a multi-billion-dollar cost to the state budget with limited broad-based return.

Texas should not subsidize projects that deliver low job density and high resource intensity at the expense of residents. I support policies that require large industrial users to pay the full cost of the power and water infrastructure they demand, so ordinary ratepayers are not left covering the difference. Water and energy allocation should prioritize existing communities, agriculture, and higher-value uses that produce more sustained local employment and economic benefit for constituents.

Local governments need clearer authority and transparency on proposed projects so communities can weigh real impacts rather than being presented with finished deals. Fiscal responsibility means rejecting incentives that primarily benefit outside corporations while straining the systems Texans rely on every day. We can pursue economic growth without giving away taxpayer resources or scarce natural assets for projects that do not deliver proportional returns to the people who live here.

I support targeted investment in Texas water infrastructure that addresses both flooding and scarcity while protecting the agricultural economy that underpins much of the state.

Texas faces the dual challenge of flood risk and long-term water shortages driven by drought, groundwater depletion, and growth. Hundreds of waterways remain impaired. Agriculture is the largest user of groundwater and must be treated as a partner, not an adversary, in any workable solution.

Policies I would support: • Prioritize funding and permitting for projects that deliver measurable results: reservoir expansion and new storage where scientifically justified, flood-control infrastructure in high-risk basins, and upgrades to aging treatment and distribution systems that improve both quantity and quality. • Expand voluntary, market-based conservation tools for agricultural producers—cost-share programs for efficient irrigation, aquifer recharge projects, and water-marketing options—rather than top-down mandates that threaten farm and ranch viability. • Strengthen local groundwater conservation districts and regional water planning groups so decisions stay closer to the people who live with the consequences, while ensuring clear accountability and data transparency. • Require that major industrial users (including data centers) pay the full cost of the water and wastewater capacity they demand so residential customers and agricultural producers are not subsidizing them. • Support practical water-quality improvements focused on the highest-impact pollutants without creating new regulatory layers that slow infrastructure delivery or raise costs without clear benefit.

Considerations guiding this approach: Agriculture feeds Texas and the nation. Policies that undermine producers through excessive regulation or water cutbacks without alternatives will damage rural economies and food security. At the same time, unchecked groundwater mining and polluted waterways harm everyone downstream. The guiding principle is results over process: build the infrastructure we need, protect property rights, keep costs transparent, and treat farmers and ranchers as essential partners in conservation rather than targets of restriction. Texas can secure reliable water supplies without sacrificing the agricultural foundation that has sustained the state for generations.

I support policies that put grid reliability first for Texas families and businesses.

Extreme heat and rapidly growing demand—especially from large new loads such as data centers—continue to stress the ERCOT system. Reliability is not optional. When the lights go out, lives, livelihoods, and the economy are put at risk.

Policies I would support: • Require large industrial users, including data centers, to secure or build adequate firm generation capacity so they do not free-ride on the existing system or drive up costs and risk for residential and small-business customers. • Expand incentives and streamlined permitting for reliable, dispatchable power—natural gas, nuclear, and other firm resources that can run when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. • Strengthen weatherization and maintenance standards for critical generation and transmission assets without creating endless new bureaucracy. • Ensure market rules reward actual performance and availability during peak demand rather than subsidizing intermittent resources that leave the grid short when Texans need power most. • Maintain transparency on costs so ratepayers can see who is driving demand growth and who is paying for it.

Texas must keep its independent grid, but independence only works if the system delivers power when people need it. My priority is clear: protect reliability for everyday Texans and the businesses that employ them, require big new loads to carry their own weight, and reject policies that sacrifice dependability for ideology or special interests.

I support protecting the stability of Texas research institutions against sudden federal policy shifts that create unfunded costs, while insisting on accountability for how research dollars are spent.

Texas universities and hospitals receive roughly $1.9 billion in annual NIH funding that supports tens of thousands of jobs and advances medical and scientific work with real benefits for patients and the economy. Indirect cost reimbursements cover the facilities, administration, and infrastructure required to conduct that research. An abrupt 15% federal cap would cut an estimated $300 million per year that institutions would be forced to absorb or shift onto other sources.

Policies I would support: • Oppose arbitrary federal caps that ignore negotiated rates and suddenly shift hundreds of millions in costs onto Texas institutions and, ultimately, Texas taxpayers or tuition payers. • Require greater transparency and efficiency in how indirect cost rates are calculated and used, so funding prioritizes actual research capacity rather than administrative bloat. • Maintain competitive federal research investment that rewards results and excellence, not simply volume of spending. • At the state level, resist pressure to automatically backfill federal reductions with new general-revenue spending. Institutions should first examine internal efficiencies, and any limited state support should be targeted, temporary, and tied to clear performance expectations.

Texas benefits when its research enterprise remains strong. Federal partners should not impose sudden, across-the-board cuts that undermine that capacity while claiming to promote efficiency. The responsible path is stable, accountable funding that sustains high-quality research without transferring the bill to Texas families or forcing institutions into sudden shortfalls.

I approach these issues with transparency first and respect for parental authority.

Parents have the primary responsibility for their children’s health decisions. Government’s role is to provide accurate, complete information—not to use fear, pressure, or social engineering to force rapid compliance. When officials highlight tragic outcomes, the public deserves full and precise facts rather than selective framing designed to drive policy.

Measles is a serious disease. Declining vaccination rates create real risks of outbreaks, and communities deserve clear data on cases, hospitalizations, and outcomes. At the same time, public health communication must avoid exaggeration or incomplete accounts that erode trust. People make better decisions when they receive honest information and are free to weigh it according to their own values and circumstances.

Policies I would support: • Protect existing parental rights to make medical decisions for their children, including the current conscientious exemption process, without adding new mandates or barriers. • Require state health agencies to publish timely, transparent, and complete data on outbreaks—including vaccination status, underlying conditions, and verified causes of severe outcomes—so the public can evaluate claims for themselves. • Reject coercive measures, school exclusion policies beyond current law, or public campaigns that treat disagreement as ignorance rather than legitimate concern. • Support voluntary access to vaccines for families who choose them, while ensuring no one is penalized or stigmatized for exercising their rights.

Informed consent requires accurate information, not pressure. Texas families are capable of making decisions for their own children when they are given the full picture rather than messaging designed to produce a predetermined outcome. My priority is protecting both public health through transparency and the freedom of parents to act according to their best judgment.

Scientific evidence should inform policymaking, but it does not dictate it.

Science provides useful tools for understanding risks, trade-offs, and likely outcomes. Good policy starts with the best available evidence rather than ideology or emotion. At the same time, science is never complete, experts can be wrong or influenced by incentives, and policy decisions always involve values, costs, individual rights, and public consent that pure data cannot resolve.

How I evaluate competing or uncertain claims: I look first at the quality of the evidence—study design, sample size, replication, funding sources, and whether results have held up over time. I examine whether researchers or agencies have incentives that could shape conclusions. I weigh practical consequences and opportunity costs, not just modeled projections. When claims conflict, I favor transparent data and open debate over appeals to authority or consensus statements that shut down questioning.

When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge: Public opinion and individual liberty still matter. Consensus is not infallible, and history shows repeated cases where majority expert opinion later proved incomplete or incorrect. In a free society, policymakers should present the evidence clearly, explain uncertainties honestly, and respect the right of citizens to weigh risks and benefits for themselves—especially on issues that affect personal health, parental authority, property, or livelihood. Forcing compliance through mandates or social pressure when large numbers of people remain unconvinced damages trust and often produces worse long-term results.

My approach is straightforward: use rigorous evidence, demand transparency, acknowledge limits and uncertainty, and never treat expert consensus as a substitute for democratic accountability or individual judgment. Policy should be guided by facts and constrained by liberty.

I would support close coordination with USDA and Texas A&M AgriLife, targeted funding for surveillance and rapid treatment, and clear guidance to ranchers on quarantine, movement controls, and reporting requirements. I would also back investments in veterinary workforce capacity, cross‑border cooperation, and emergency response planning so we can contain this outbreak quickly and prevent future ones. My approach would be informed by USDA APHIS data, past eradication efforts, and input from local producers and veterinarians.

I would support policies that ensure responsible development, including clear standards for water and energy use, transparency around tax incentives, and utility‑rate structures that protect local consumers. I would also rely on ERCOT forecasts, environmental impact data, and input from local communities and industry experts to guide decisions, so growth does not outpace infrastructure or harm surrounding areas.

I would support investments in modernizing water systems, expanding conservation programs, and improving water‑quality protections for communities facing pollution. Because agriculture is central to Texas’s economy and the largest groundwater user, I would work with producers to promote efficient irrigation, soil‑health practices, and voluntary conservation incentives. My approach would be guided by TWDB data, TCEQ water‑quality assessments, and input from farmers, local officials, and water experts to ensure solutions are both sustainable and economically practical.

I would support expanding transmission, increasing dispatchable generation, and strengthening demand‑response tools so consumers and businesses have more stability. My approach would rely on ERCOT data and input from communities and energy experts to ensure the grid keeps pace with growth.

I would support policies that protect full reimbursement for both direct and indirect costs and strengthen state investments in research facilities. This approach is guided by evidence showing that reduced indirect funding would force institutions to absorb hundreds of millions in costs, threatening their ability to maintain labs, retain talent, and compete nationally. Protecting this funding ensures Texas remains a leader in medical and scientific innovation.

I support strengthening disease surveillance, improving vaccination access, and partnering with trusted local leaders to address concerns directly. This approach is guided by evidence showing measles can cause severe complications and that community trust is essential for protecting children and preventing future outbreaks.

Scientific evidence should play a central role in policymaking because it helps us understand problems clearly and anticipate the consequences of different choices. I would rely on expert input, peer‑reviewed research, and data from agencies and universities, and evaluate competing or uncertain claims by looking at the strength of the evidence, the quality of the methods, and whether findings are consistent across multiple sources. When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, I believe policymakers should communicate clearly, engage communities respectfully, and make decisions grounded in the best available evidence while working to build public trust and understanding.

As Chief of Staff while our office served on the House Agriculture and Livestock Committee, I saw how quickly animal health threats can hurt Texas producers. I support fully funding the Texas Animal Health Commission’s surveillance and rapid-response work, expanding sterile-fly production and deployment, and increasing veterinary capacity in affected areas. The sterile-fly technique eradicated screwworm from the U.S. before, so we should scale what we know works. I would also create an emergency biosecurity relief fund for farmers and ranchers placed under quarantine or livestock movement restrictions, helping cover testing, veterinary care, treatment, and other costs they take on to contain an outbreak. Producers who do the right thing to protect the rest of Texas should not have to bear that cost alone.

I support a pause on major new data centers until Texas puts real protections in place. These facilities can consume enormous amounts of electricity and water while creating relatively few permanent jobs. Before one is built, developers should prove the local water supply and grid can handle it, disclose projected water and power use, use reclaimed water through purple-pipe systems wherever feasible, and pay the full infrastructure costs their project creates. We also need strong protections against the noise and pollution these facilities can create, particularly when they are located near homes and schools. Local residents should have a meaningful voice before these projects are approved, particularly when their water supply, utility bills, land, and quality of life are at stake.

Texas needs to treat water infrastructure with the same urgency we treat roads and the electric grid. As Chief of Staff in this district, I worked on legislation to address Texas’s water challenges, including policies to reduce water loss from aging infrastructure, expand conservation and reuse, and better capture and manage stormwater. I would continue that work in the Legislature, including expanding purple-pipe systems and protecting our waterways from pollution. Agriculture must be a partner in this effort. I support helping farmers and ranchers invest in efficient irrigation, soil and water conservation, and technology that reduces groundwater use without threatening their livelihoods or our food supply.

During Winter Storm Uri, I lost power for days while helping seniors in our district get food and water. I know what grid failure looks like for families. I support adding generation and battery storage, expanding and weatherizing transmission, and investing in energy efficiency. We should build battery storage and microgrids around nursing homes, hospitals, fire stations, and other critical facilities, strengthen weatherization requirements for power plants and natural gas infrastructure, expand rooftop and community solar, and help consumers and businesses make energy-efficiency improvements that lower demand and their electric bills. We also need stronger accountability at ERCOT and the PUC.

Texas cannot afford to lose research infrastructure that took decades to build. I support protecting negotiated NIH reimbursement rates and creating a state bridge fund when federal research dollars are abruptly cut or withheld. Those investments keep labs open, retain researchers, protect Texas jobs, and ensure promising medical and scientific research does not disappear because of political decisions in Washington.

We have a responsibility to protect children and our communities from preventable disease. Vaccines work, and the deaths of two unvaccinated Texas children from measles should be a wake-up call. I support fully funding DSHS and local health departments, making vaccines accessible and affordable, strengthening school vaccination requirements, and reviewing Texas’s overly permissive process for nonmedical exemptions. During outbreaks, public health officials and schools must have the authority and resources to act quickly and stop the spread. Public health policy should be driven by science and evidence, not misinformation.

I believe in science. Scientific evidence and expert input should guide policymaking, especially when decisions affect public health, safety, our environment, and our economy. I will look to credible research, data, and experts in the field and adjust policy as new evidence develops. When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, I will follow the evidence and be honest with Texans about why.

Texas must take the New World screwworm threat seriously and act quickly. As a STEM teacher and researcher, I understand how important it is to use science, innovation, and early detection to protect our livestock and food supply.

I support expanding surveillance and early-warning systems using advanced technology, including AI-powered drones, modernized traps, and improved tracking of screwworm risk. Texas should also work with scientists to enhance sterile-fly production and advance precision-guided sterile insect techniques, including research into genetically engineered male-only strains such as the Nova fly.

We should provide funding for scientists in cell, engineering, agriculture and developmental biology to research new approaches to detection, prevention, and eradication. The goal should be to identify and stop infestations before they spread not wait until Texas ranchers are facing hundreds of millions of dollars in livestock losses.

This threat affects our livestock, our agriculture, our food production, and ultimately our families. I support policies that help our Texas ranchers, our food supply, and our economy. Prevention is far less expensive than allowing a preventable agricultural crisis to become a multibillion-dollar problem.

Keywords: threat, biology, engineered, prevention

I support innovation and technology, including data centers, because technology is part of our everyday lives and an important part of Texas’ future. But growth cannot come at the expense of our water, electrical grid, environment, or families.

Here in Bexar County, we have experienced electrical outages, and San Antonio depends on the Edwards Aquifer as a critical water resource. These resources are not unlimited. I will support legislation requiring businesses that place demands on our water and electrical systems to be accountable for their consumption and their impact on the communities where they operate.

I also support encouraging large data centers to become more energy self-reliant by developing on-site power generation and energy storage. When these facilities can produce much of the energy they need themselves, they can reduce the strain on the existing Texas grid. When excess power is available and can legally and safely be sold or returned to the grid, that additional generation could help increase available electricity for surrounding communities and potentially help reduce costs.

There should also be greater transparency on water and energy usage, protection of our Edward’s Aquifer and other water resources, responsible use of the electrical grid, and consideration of pollution, noise, heat emissions, land use, and proximity to neighborhoods, schools, and families. Businesses should also invest in modern, innovative technologies that reduce water and energy consumption systems such as using recycling rainwater or in water data centers for cooling.

I believe decisions should be guided by data, science, and measurable outcomes. Texas can welcome innovation and economic growth while still protecting the resources.

We need innovative technology for our future, but we also need water, reliable electricity, and a healthy environment for that future to exist.

Keywords: science, data, innovation, technology

Texas needs to take a more proactive approach to both flooding and water conservation. Here in San Antonio, we have seen firsthand how quickly flooding can become deadly. On July 11, Dr. Kenneth Stuart, a 76-year-old federal civilian employee who served at JBSA-Lackland for 32 years, lost his life after his vehicle was caught in a flash flood.

I support policies that invest in modern flood-detection technology, including expanded radar, stream gauges, real-time water-level monitoring, and location-specific warning systems that can give families more time to get to safety. We should use technology and engineering to identify dangerous areas before a disaster occurs, not after lives are lost.

Texas also needs to invest in upgrading aging drainage, bridges, flood-control systems, and other infrastructure that can worsen flooding. We should work with local emergency management, FEMA, engineers, universities, and research centers to develop faster response systems and better ways to move floodwater safely out of populated areas.

At the same time, we should look at floodwater as a resource not simply something to move away and lose. Where appropriate and safe, Texas should invest in systems that capture, treat, store, recycle, and reuse water for agriculture, industry, landscaping, and other non-potable purposes.

I believe we should support policies that use the best science and technology available. We cannot prevent every flood, but we can be better prepared, give people earlier warnings, build smarter infrastructure, and turn more of our water into a resource.

Texas has to protect our water because water is essential to our families, agriculture, economy, and future. The 2024 303(d) List shows that hundreds of Texas waterways have documented impairments, and we need to address those problems before they become even more expensive and difficult to solve.

I support investing in modern water-quality monitoring, real-time sensors, improved wastewater and storm water infrastructure, and technology that allows us to detect pollution earlier. We also need accountability for businesses and other entities that pollute our waterways while making sure responsible businesses have clear standards they can meet.

I support incentives for efficient irrigation, water recycling and reuse, groundwater conservation, and innovative agricultural practices that protect our water while allowing farmers to continue producing the food we depend on.

I believe we should use data and proven science to make these decisions. We need to conserve the water we have, protect the quality of that water, invest in modern infrastructure, and support the agricultural economy that helps feed Texas.

Keywords: conservation, flood, infrastructure

I support innovation and the growth of AI and data centers in Texas, but large facilities should also help address the energy demands they create. One solution is encouraging more on-site power generation and energy storage so these facilities are not placing unnecessary strain on the existing grid.

When technically and legally feasible, excess electricity generated by these facilities could be fed back into the grid or sold through appropriate market mechanisms, creating additional power for surrounding communities and potentially helping reduce costs for consumers.

This is an opportunity to expand our energy capacity while encouraging businesses to take greater responsibility for their own energy needs. Instead of simply building a larger grid and passing those costs on to Texas families, we should encourage innovative power solutions that benefit both the businesses investing in Texas and the communities around them.

I support innovation policies, but I also support smart infrastructure, accountability, and finding ways for new technology to help strengthen not strain the Texas grid.

Keywords: innovation, grid, power, electricity, recycle

As a STEM teacher with a Bachelor of Science in Biology and extensive chemistry studies as a pre-med student, I understand firsthand that science is more than a subject we teach in our classrooms science saves lives.

Research laboratories, medical schools, universities, and scientific institutions are the foundation for developing new medicines, improving treatments, training doctors, and preparing the next generation of scientists. Texas cannot afford to weaken that foundation.

I support policies that strengthen funding for scientists, medical schools, research laboratories, and workforce development. I would work to advance policies that encourage public-private partnerships, expand opportunities for medical and scientific education, and keep Texas competitive in biotechnology, medicine, and emerging technologies.

We are already facing serious concerns about the future physician workforce, including projected physician shortages in 2030. We need to invest now in the people and institutions that will train our doctors, conduct life-saving research, and develop the technologies of tomorrow.

Countries such as Japan and China are making significant investments in science and technology. Texas and America must continue to lead not fall behind.

As an educator and scientist by training, I believe investing in science is an investment in our children, our healthcare, our economy, and ultimately in saving lives.

Keywords: doctor, research, training, university

I support policies that protect children and families while being grounded in science, data, and sound medical guidance. Parents’ concerns about their children’s health should be respected, and families should have access to accurate information from qualified medical professionals so they can make informed decisions.

We should respect families, follow the evidence, and make decisions that protect the health and safety of Texas children and communities.

Texas reported 762 confirmed measles cases in 2025, including 99 hospitalizations and two deaths so these outbreaks should be taken seriously.

I support policies that follow Texas existing school immunization requirements, including the exemptions currently allowed under state law, while ensuring parents have access to reliable medical information so they can make informed decisions for their children.

We should listen to parents, follow the science, and take infectious disease outbreaks seriously.

Keywords: immunization, science, infectious diseases

Scientific evidence and expert input should play a central role in policymaking. You would not create education policy without listening to teachers who have actually been in the classroom, so the same principle should apply to science, medicine, environmental research, water, agriculture, and public safety.

There is a difference between studying something in theory and actually doing the work. Policymakers should work directly with qualified professionals who understand these issues firsthand and have the research and experience to support their recommendations.

I also believe we should hear from multiple qualified experts and consider different perspectives. Competing claims should be evaluated based on credible research, data, evidence, and real-world results.

Good policy starts with understanding the issue, listening to the experts, and using evidence to make informed decisions. When people’s lives and our future are at stake, we cannot afford to make decisions based on assumptions.

Keywords: policymaker, expert, medicine

Texas agriculture is far too important to our state to wait until the screwworm problem becomes a full-scale crisis. I believe Texas should work closely with the USDA, Texas Animal Health Commission, veterinarians, ranchers, and local officials to identify outbreaks quickly, contain them, and use sterile-fly technology that has worked successfully in the past.

We also need to look beyond this particular outbreak. Texas should have the diagnostic capabilities, trained personnel, emergency plans, and other resources ready before the next agricultural threat reaches our livestock. With an industry as important as agriculture, being prepared is a lot less expensive than reacting after an outbreak gets out of control.

I also believe we need to listen to the ranchers and livestock producers who are dealing with this firsthand. Any restrictions on livestock movement need to be based on actual conditions and lifted when they are no longer necessary. If the government requires producers to take costly actions for the benefit of the entire livestock industry, we should also look at reasonable assistance for those producers.

This should not be about creating another government bureaucracy. It should be about using methods that work, getting resources where they are needed, and protecting Texas agriculture before the economic damage becomes much greater.

Personal takeaways: Protect Texas agriculture before an outbreak becomes a crisis; use methods that have already proven successful; listen to Texas ranchers and livestock producers; preparedness costs less than an uncontrolled outbreak.

Keywords: Agriculture; livestock; biosecurity; screwworm; ranchers; sterile-fly technology; disease prevention.

I want Texas to continue attracting new businesses and investment, and data centers can certainly be part of that growth. But we also have to ask a basic question: who is paying for the additional electricity, water, transmission, and infrastructure these massive facilities require? The answer should not automatically be Texas homeowners and small businesses.

Before state or local governments provide major tax incentives, we need to know what Texans are actually getting in return. How many permanent jobs will be created? How much private investment is being made? How much water and electricity will the project use? What additional infrastructure will taxpayers and ratepayers have to support? Those are reasonable questions to ask before committing public resources.

I also believe extremely large power users should be responsible for a fair share of the infrastructure costs they create. If data centers can provide their own generation, storage, backup capacity, or participate in programs that reduce demand when the grid is under stress, we should encourage that. Water use should also be evaluated based on the actual supply available in the community where the facility will be located.

I welcome economic development, but an incentive is only worthwhile if taxpayers receive a real return on their investment. Growth should benefit the communities where it occurs, not simply leave existing residents with a larger utility bill.

Personal takeaways: Texas should welcome investment without subsidizing excessive infrastructure costs; taxpayers deserve a return on incentives; large power users should pay their fair share; growth should benefit the communities where it occurs.

Keywords: Data centers; economic development; electricity; water; tax incentives; ERCOT; utility costs; taxpayers.

Water is going to be one of the biggest infrastructure challenges Texas faces over the next several decades. We are dealing with population growth, drought, flooding, groundwater concerns, aging pipes, and water-quality issues at the same time. We need to start treating water infrastructure with the same long-term seriousness that we give highways and the electric grid.

That means investing in new supply where it makes sense, repairing aging water and wastewater systems, expanding reuse and conservation, improving flood-control projects, and protecting groundwater and water quality. We also need to prioritize projects carefully. There is not an unlimited amount of taxpayer money available, so we should put resources toward projects that provide the greatest long-term benefit.

Agriculture needs to be at the table when these decisions are made. Farmers and ranchers are not only major water users; they are also important partners in conservation. Better irrigation technology, voluntary conservation programs, groundwater recharge, and improved land-management practices can save water while allowing Texas agriculture to remain productive.

I would also like to see us do a better job of connecting flood planning with water planning. When possible, we should find ways to capture, store, recharge, or reuse some of the water we currently spend enormous amounts of money trying to move away during floods. Texas needs a water strategy that works for our cities and our farms and makes sense for taxpayers.

Personal takeaways: Treat water as critical Texas infrastructure; agriculture needs a seat at the table; repair what we already have; connect flood planning with future water supply.

Keywords: Water; infrastructure; agriculture; drought; flooding; groundwater; conservation; water reuse; aging infrastructure.

For me, the starting point is simple: when Texans flip the switch, the power needs to come on. Families need dependable electricity during a 105-degree summer afternoon, and businesses need confidence that the grid can support their operations.

I support using every reliable energy resource Texas has available. That includes natural gas, nuclear, wind, solar, battery storage, improved transmission, demand-response programs, and new technologies as they become practical. I don’t think our energy policy should be built around picking political favorites. We should be looking at what keeps the grid reliable and electricity affordable.

Texas also needs additional transmission and dependable generation as our population and economy continue to grow. At the same time, we cannot ignore the enormous amount of new electricity being requested by data centers and other large facilities. If a project creates the need for major new grid infrastructure, that project should pay an appropriate share of the cost instead of automatically passing it along to existing customers.

The goal is not complicated: enough dependable power to meet our needs, reasonable reserves when conditions get difficult, and electric bills Texas families and businesses can afford.

Personal takeaways: When Texans flip the switch, the power needs to come on; use every reliable energy resource available; don’t pick political winners and losers; protect existing customers from unfair costs.

Keywords: ERCOT; electricity; reliability; natural gas; nuclear; renewables; transmission; generation; utility costs.

Texas has some of the finest universities, hospitals, medical schools, and research institutions anywhere in the country. The research taking place at these institutions creates jobs, trains doctors and scientists, attracts private investment, and leads to medical advances that can improve people’s lives. We should recognize that as an important Texas asset.

At the same time, federal research money is taxpayer money, and institutions receiving it should be able to explain where it goes. There should be transparency and accountability for both direct research expenses and the indirect costs associated with laboratories, facilities, cybersecurity, compliance, administration, and other support needed to conduct that research.

What I don’t support is pretending legitimate expenses disappear because Washington decides to impose an arbitrary percentage. If there is waste in the system, identify it and eliminate it. If reimbursement rates need to be changed, make the process transparent and give institutions enough predictability to plan responsibly.

I also don’t believe Texas taxpayers should simply write a check every time Washington reduces federal spending. We should determine which research is particularly important to Texas and look for partnerships among universities, hospitals, private industry, philanthropy, and the state. We can protect important Texas research while still demanding accountability for taxpayer dollars.

Personal takeaways: Texas research is an economic and medical asset; taxpayer money requires accountability; eliminate actual waste instead of using arbitrary cuts; Texas should not automatically replace every lost federal dollar.

Keywords: NIH; medical research; universities; hospitals; innovation; taxpayer accountability; research funding.

I think one mistake government makes on issues like vaccines is assuming that anyone asking questions is automatically against vaccines or against science. Parents have every right to ask questions about something involving their children, and they deserve straightforward answers rather than being dismissed or talked down to.

We also can’t ignore what happens when serious infectious diseases spread. Texas experienced hundreds of measles cases, hospitalizations, and the deaths of two school-age children during the recent outbreak. Those are real consequences, and public officials have a responsibility to take them seriously.

My preference is to start with good information, access to qualified healthcare professionals, transparency about benefits and risks, and a strong ability to respond quickly when an outbreak occurs. When government action becomes necessary during a serious outbreak, it should be based on credible evidence, proportional to the actual risk, and reevaluated as circumstances change.

Trust is something government has to earn. The best way to do that is to give people the facts, admit when there are uncertainties, answer legitimate questions, and treat parents with respect while still protecting children and other vulnerable Texans.

Personal takeaways: Parents have a right to ask questions; don’t dismiss legitimate concerns; give people the facts; protect vulnerable Texans; government has to earn public trust.

Keywords: Measles; vaccines; parents; public health; transparency; children; outbreak response; trust.

I want good information before I make a decision. Whether we are talking about healthcare, agriculture, water, electricity, or environmental issues, scientific evidence and qualified experts can help lawmakers understand the likely consequences of the choices we make.

That doesn’t mean an expert makes the policy decision for us. Science may tell us what is happening or what the likely outcome of a particular action will be, but elected officials still have to weigh costs, individual rights, economic impacts, practical considerations, and the proper role of government. That’s part of the job we are elected to do.

When experts disagree, I want to know why. I would look at the quality of the research, whether the findings have been repeated, whether the underlying data and methods stand up to scrutiny, and how much uncertainty actually exists. I also think it is important to hear from more than one qualified source, particularly when a decision could have major consequences.

Public opinion matters because elected officials represent the public, but public opinion can’t change a scientific fact. At the same time, scientific consensus shouldn’t be used as a reason to stop asking legitimate questions. My approach is to follow the best evidence available, listen to the people affected by the decision, be honest about what we don’t know, and be willing to change course when better information comes along.

Personal takeaways: Get good information before making decisions; experts inform policy but don’t make it; ask questions when experts disagree; public opinion matters, but it can’t change scientific facts; be willing to change course when the evidence changes.

Keywords: Science; evidence; experts; policymaking; public opinion; transparency; uncertainty; accountability.

I would support rapid detection, expanded livestock surveillance, and close coordination between Texas, USDA, ranchers, and veterinarians. I’d fund sterile-insect programs, testing, quarantine when necessary, and producer assistance. Policies should be science-based and informed by past outbreaks, economic impacts, veterinary expertise, and regular monitoring to ensure measures protect Texas agriculture without imposing unnecessary burdens on producers.

I support policies that balance economic growth with responsible use of Texas’s water and energy resources. Decisions should rely on scientific assessments of water availability, grid capacity, environmental impacts, and long-term community needs. I would favor efficient water use, conservation, reliable energy infrastructure, and incentives tied to measurable public benefits while protecting taxpayers and ratepayers.

I would support a long-term, science-based strategy to strengthen Texas’s water infrastructure while protecting the agricultural economy that depends on reliable water supplies. Texas needs to address both extremes, drought and flooding, by investing in infrastructure that captures and stores water when it is available and delivers it efficiently when communities and farms need it.

I would prioritize repairing aging water systems, expanding conservation and water-reuse projects, improving reservoirs and groundwater management, and investing in flood-control infrastructure where scientifically justified. I would also support better monitoring of groundwater levels and water quality so policymakers and local groundwater conservation districts can make decisions based on current data rather than reacting after supplies become critically depleted.

Agriculture should be treated as a partner in conservation, not simply as a source of water demand. Farmers and ranchers should have access to incentives and technical assistance for efficient irrigation, soil-health practices, drought-resistant crops, improved irrigation technology, and other methods that reduce water use without undermining agricultural production. Conservation programs should be voluntary and designed around measurable water savings whenever possible.

I would also support stronger protection of rivers, aquifers, and drinking-water sources from pollution. Preventing contamination is often more cost-effective than trying to restore a damaged water supply later. Policies should be based on sound hydrology, agricultural science, and local conditions rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

Most importantly, Texas should balance conservation with economic realities. Agriculture is essential to rural communities and the state’s economy, so water policies should not unintentionally make farming and ranching financially unsustainable. I would use scientific evidence, input from farmers and water experts, projected population growth, drought conditions, and long-term groundwater data to guide decisions. The goal should be a resilient water system that protects communities, supports agriculture, prepares for extreme weather, and preserves Texas’s water resources for future generations.

I would support a balanced approach to strengthening the Texas power grid by investing in transmission, generation, energy storage, and grid resilience. Extreme heat can increase electricity demand while also reducing the efficiency of some power infrastructure, so Texas needs sufficient capacity and reserves to handle periods of peak demand.

I would support upgrading aging transmission lines, expanding battery storage, and encouraging a diverse energy portfolio that includes natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar. No single energy source should carry the entire burden of reliability. A diverse grid can reduce the risk that a failure or extreme weather event affecting one resource creates widespread problems.

I would also support stronger incentives for weatherization and grid hardening, including protecting critical infrastructure from extreme heat, winter storms, flooding, and other hazards. Utilities and power generators should be held accountable for meeting reliability standards, while consumers should not be forced to absorb unnecessary costs.

Texas should also improve forecasting and planning as electricity demand grows. ERCOT should regularly evaluate population growth, industrial development, extreme-weather risks, and emerging technologies when determining how much generation and transmission capacity will be needed. Large new electricity users should contribute fairly to the infrastructure required to serve them rather than shifting those costs onto existing ratepayers.

Finally, I would expand energy-efficiency programs that help households and businesses reduce consumption during periods of extreme demand. Lowering peak demand can improve reliability while reducing electricity costs.

My approach would be guided by engineering evidence, ERCOT reliability data, weather and climate trends, consumer costs, and the long-term needs of Texas communities. The goal should be a grid that is reliable during extreme conditions, affordable for consumers, and flexible enough to support Texas’s continued economic growth.

I would support protecting Texas’s research infrastructure because universities and hospitals are not only centers of scientific discovery but also major employers and drivers of economic growth. Reductions in federal research funding can affect laboratories, clinical trials, graduate education, and the highly skilled workforce that Texas needs to remain competitive.

At the federal level, I would support maintaining a predictable, competitive system for reimbursing legitimate indirect research costs. Institutions should be accountable for demonstrating that these funds support research infrastructure, facilities, compliance, and administration, but broad funding caps should not undermine the infrastructure necessary to conduct federally supported research. Federal agencies should work with institutions to establish sustainable reimbursement policies based on actual costs and transparent reporting.

At the state level, Texas should strengthen its commitment to research by providing competitive grants, matching funds for federal awards, and targeted support for laboratories and research facilities. I would prioritize investments that leverage federal funding rather than simply replace it. Texas could also create emergency or bridge-funding mechanisms to help institutions maintain critical research programs when federal funding changes unexpectedly.

I would especially support partnerships among universities, hospitals, private industry, and state agencies to translate research into new treatments, technologies, businesses, and high-paying jobs. Investments should be evaluated based on scientific merit, economic impact, healthcare benefits, workforce development, and the potential to attract additional outside funding.

My approach would be guided by evidence and fiscal responsibility. Texas should protect research programs that demonstrate measurable public value while maintaining strong accountability for how taxpayer dollars are spent. Stable research funding benefits more than individual universities—it strengthens Texas’s healthcare system, economy, workforce, and ability to compete nationally and globally in science and innovation.

I would approach vaccine policy with respect, transparency, and a commitment to science. When communities have concerns about vaccine safety, policymakers should listen rather than dismiss those concerns. I would support accessible public forums where parents can ask questions directly to physicians, epidemiologists, and public health officials, with clear information about both vaccine benefits and potential risks.

Because measles is highly contagious and can cause serious illness, I support maintaining strong school immunization requirements while preserving appropriate medical exemptions. I would also support improving access to vaccinations through schools, pediatric offices, pharmacies, and community health centers so cost, transportation, or scheduling do not become barriers.

Public health agencies should provide timely, transparent information during outbreaks, including where cases are occurring, how transmission is happening, and what precautions families can take. I would also support investments in disease surveillance, laboratory capacity, contact tracing, and rapid response so outbreaks can be identified and contained early.

Trust is essential. Government should not rely solely on mandates or messaging from Austin. Local physicians, nurses, school officials, faith and community leaders, and trusted local organizations can help communicate accurate information in ways that respect different communities.

My policies would be guided by the best available medical and epidemiological evidence, while recognizing that parents deserve honest answers about vaccine benefits and risks. The goal should be to protect children and vulnerable Texans, reduce preventable disease, and maintain public confidence through transparency, accessibility, and respectful engagement rather than fear or misinformation.

Scientific evidence and expert input should play a central role in my policymaking process, particularly when decisions involve public health, energy, agriculture, environmental protection, and other areas where technical expertise matters. However, science should inform policy rather than replace the role of elected representatives and the public.

When evaluating competing scientific claims, I would consider the quality of the underlying research, whether findings have been independently replicated, the strength of the evidence, potential conflicts of interest, and the level of agreement among qualified experts. I would also distinguish between established scientific findings and areas where legitimate uncertainty remains. When evidence is incomplete, policymakers should acknowledge that uncertainty rather than presenting assumptions as facts.

I would seek input from researchers, universities, professional organizations, industry experts, and affected communities. I would also favor transparent review processes so the public can understand what evidence is being considered and why a particular policy was chosen.

When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, I believe policymakers have a responsibility to listen respectfully to the public while still relying on the strongest available evidence. Public concerns should be taken seriously, especially when policies affect people’s livelihoods, health, or communities. However, popular opinion should not determine whether an established scientific fact is true.

At the same time, scientific consensus should not be treated as permanently unquestionable. Science advances by testing assumptions, challenging conclusions, and incorporating new evidence. Policymakers should therefore remain willing to revise policies when credible new evidence emerges.

My goal would be evidence-based but not evidence-only policymaking: use the best available science to understand likely consequences, listen to the people affected, consider economic and ethical factors, and make decisions transparently. That approach allows government to respect both scientific integrity and democratic accountability.

Texas’s agricultural industry is a cornerstone of our state’s economy, and we cannot afford to take this outbreak lightly. The New World screwworm threatens ranchers, livestock producers, local businesses, and further drives up cost for working families.

My approach would be guided by science and the recommendations of experts at the USDA, the Texas Animal Health Commission, veterinarians, and producers on the ground. Texas should work in close partnership with the federal government to ensure the state has the resources necessary to contain the outbreak and respond quickly to prevent further spread.

As a state representative, I believe my responsibility is to ensure experts have the resources they need and to act quickly.

Communities should have a voice in deciding whether data centers are built in their neighborhoods, because local residents are the ones who will live with the long-term impacts. Economic development should not be something imposed on a community from Austin or by large corporations.

If a community chooses to welcome a data center, Texas must ensure that working families are protected. Residential utility bills should not increase to subsidize the massive energy demands of these facilities, and strong safeguards should be in place to protect local water supplies and preserve land and water quality.

I would also closely scrutinize any tax incentives offered to data center developers. Texas can support innovation and economic growth, but corporations should not receive special treatment while local communities are left to absorb the costs.

Water policy in Texas cannot be separated from flooding, especially in Harris County, where families continue to face the devastating consequences of major storms and inadequate infrastructure. Protecting our communities from flooding must be a top priority.

I strongly oppose efforts by Governor Abbott and state leaders to undermine local control of the Harris County Flood Control District. Decisions about flood mitigation and infrastructure should be made by the local communities that understand these challenges best, not dictated by politicians in Austin.

I would also fight for Harris County to receive its fair share of state and federal resources. Too often, our region is left competing for limited funding while critical flood control projects remain unfinished. We need stronger partnerships between state and local governments, increased investment in flood mitigation projects, and long-term planning that protects both our communities and our water resources.

Texas families should never have to worry about whether the lights will stay on during a winter storm or a summer heat wave. The failures we saw during Winter Storm Uri, and the widespread outages many Houstonians experienced after Hurricane Beryl, made it clear that our grid needs stronger oversight, better planning, and greater accountability.

House District 133 is home to the Energy Corridor, and the people who live and work here understand better than most how important a reliable energy system is to Texas’s economy. Our district is uniquely positioned to help shape the future of energy policy in Texas.

I support investing in a more reliable and resilient electric grid, including modernizing infrastructure and ensuring our energy system can keep pace with Texas’s rapid growth. Large industrial users, including data centers, should be responsible for paying for the additional infrastructure and electricity they require rather than shifting those costs onto residential customers.

At the same time, utility companies must be held accountable. Many Houstonians spent days without power while CenterPoint reported record profits. Texans deserve a system that puts reliability and consumers first, not one that rewards utilities while families are left in the dark.

Texas’s universities, hospitals, and research institutions are engines of innovation that drive economic growth, create jobs, and improve the lives of millions of Texans. The discoveries made in our laboratories today often become the medical treatments, technologies, and businesses that shape our future.

The proposed federal cuts to NIH funding are deeply concerning. Reducing support for research infrastructure would undermine ongoing projects, threaten jobs, and make it harder for Texas institutions to compete for top researchers and future investment. Scientific research depends on stable, predictable funding, and abrupt cuts can disrupt years of work and delay life-saving discoveries.

As a state representative, I would advocate for consistent federal investment in research and work to strengthen partnerships between the state, universities, hospitals, and the private sector. Investing in research isn’t a partisan issue. It’s an investment in better healthcare, a stronger economy, and Texas’s long-term competitiveness.

As a father, nothing is more important to me than protecting the health and safety of our children. Vaccines have played a critical role in preventing the spread of dangerous diseases, and public health decisions should continue to be guided by medical professionals and scientific evidence.

At the same time, I believe it is important to engage with parents respectfully and address their concerns with facts, transparency, and clear communication. Dismissing or talking down to people who have questions only undermines public trust.

My role as a policymaker would be to ensure that public health agencies, physicians, and local communities have the resources they need to respond quickly to outbreaks, provide accurate information, and keep Texans safe. Public health policies should be based on evidence, while recognizing that building trust is just as important as delivering information.

Policy decisions should be guided by facts, evidence, and the expertise of the people who have dedicated their careers to studying these issues. Whether we’re discussing public health, energy, education, agriculture, or flooding, elected officials have a responsibility to listen to experts and follow the best available evidence.

At the same time, policymaking is rarely as simple as following a single study or report. Good policy requires evaluating competing evidence, listening to stakeholders, and remaining willing to adjust when new information becomes available. I believe leaders should be honest about uncertainty rather than ignoring it or allowing politics to override science.

When scientific consensus and public opinion differ, elected officials have a responsibility to communicate the evidence clearly, explain the tradeoffs involved, and engage communities in the decision-making process. Public trust is built through transparency and accountability, not by dismissing either science or the concerns of the people we represent.

The screwworm outbreak requires a rapid, evidence based response. I would support increased funding for surveillance, faster diagnostic capacity, and more field veterinarians, since early detection is proven to limit spread. I’d strengthen emergency response tools, quarantine zones, treatment programs, and producer assistance, because delays increase economic losses. I’d expand biosecurity training and cross border coordination, which USDA APHIS data shows are effective at preventing re introduction. My approach would rely on veterinary science, APHIS guidance, and producer input.

My approach is not anti-development; It is community focused, fiscally responsible growth New development for data centers should use reliable data to evaluate impacts, require developers to internalize the costs they create, protect finite resources, ensure communities share in the benefits and be transparent with the results.

I support development when it involves input from the community & delivers economic benefits such as jobs, economic development without shifting environmental, infrastructure, or utility costs to the residents causing health and financial strain.

The rapid increase in ERCOT’s projected data-center electricity demand, from roughly 30 GW to 78 GW by 2030, shows why we need evidence-based planning. Large projects should undergo transparent assessments of energy, water, land, grid, and environmental impacts before approval.

For water, I support conservation standards, water-recycling requirements where feasible, and demonstrated protection of local groundwater and surface-water resources. For energy, large data centers should pay their fair share of generation and transmission upgrades so residential and small-business customers are not subsidizing increased demand.

Texas faces both flooding and clean water issues, so I would support policies that strengthen water infrastructure, improve conservation, and protect water quality. I would invest in modernizing aging drainage systems, expanding flood mitigation projects, and upgrading water treatment facilities to reduce contamination in impaired waterways. I also support increasing funding for aquifer recharge projects, leak detection programs, and regional water reuse systems, which are proven to extend supply during drought.

Agriculture is central to Texas’s groundwater use, so my approach would focus on collaboration rather than penalties. I would support incentives for producers who adopt water efficient irrigation, soil moisture monitoring, and conservation practices shown to reduce groundwater drawdown. I would also expand partnerships with agricultural extension services and the Texas Water Development Board to ensure producers have access to data, training, and cost share programs. My decisions would be guided by hydrological science, TWDB projections, and input from farmers, water managers, and local communities.

Extreme heat and rising demand continue to strain the Texas grid, and HD 139 is directly affected by outages and reliability challenges. I would support policies that expand grid resilience through diversified generation, improved transmission infrastructure, and stronger demand‑management tools. This includes accelerating investments in battery storage, renewables, modernizing substations, and expanding microgrids for critical facilities in our district.

I would also support requiring large energy users—including data centers—to participate in demand‑response programs and adopt efficiency standards backed by ERCOT data. Evidence shows that coordinated load management and expanded storage significantly reduce peak‑time stress. My approach would be guided by engineering research, ERCOT reliability reports, and collaboration with scientists, utilities, and local communities to ensure HD 139 and throughout Texas has a grid that can withstand extreme heat and continued growth.

I support protecting predictable, long-term federal investment in medical and scientific research. NIH funding supports jobs, medical innovation, and Texas’s economy, so sudden reductions in research support can have consequences far beyond individual grants. I would oppose across the board indirect cost caps that undermine existing research agreements and institutional infrastructure.

At the state level, I support strengthening partnerships among Texas universities, hospitals, industry, and government; expanding state investments in research infrastructure and workforce development; and pursuing matching funds for competitive federal grants. At the federal level, I would advocate for stable NIH funding and reimbursement policies that reflect the actual costs of maintaining world-class research facilities.

Texas should remain a national leader in scientific research, innovation, and medical discovery. Protecting that infrastructure is an investment in our economy, our workforce, and better health outcomes for Texans.

I believe public health policy should be guided by science, transparency, and trust. Parents deserve clear, evidence-based information about vaccine safety and the risks of preventable diseases, without being dismissed when they have questions or concerns.

The 2025 measles outbreak demonstrated the consequences of declining vaccination rates. I would support strengthening access to routine childhood vaccinations, improving public-health communication, and ensuring schools and communities have timely information during outbreaks.

I also believe we must engage communities directly listening to concerns, working with trusted healthcare professionals and community leaders, and communicating the evidence in language people can understand. Vaccine confidence is built through trust, not simply mandates.

At the same time, schools have a responsibility to protect students, teachers, and medically vulnerable children. I support maintaining evidence-based school immunization requirements while ensuring families have reasonable access to vaccines and accurate information about exemptions and their public-health implications.

My goal is not to shame or divide communities. It is to protect children, prevent avoidable illness and deaths, and build enough trust that families can make informed decisions based on sound scientific evidence.

As a policymaker, I believe public health policy should be guided by sound science, transparent communication, and respect for families. I would engage communities by listening to concerns, partnering with trusted healthcare professionals and local leaders, and ensuring residents have access to clear, evidence-based information about vaccine safety and infectious disease risks.

I support policies that increase access to recommended vaccinations, strengthen public-health education, improve outbreak monitoring, and protect schools and communities from preventable disease. I also believe we must address barriers such as cost, transportation, and access to healthcare. My goal is to build trust through facts, transparency, and respectful engagement while protecting the health of children and the broader community.

It is important we continue to support the use of the sterile insect technique to manage New World screwworm populations in Texas and across North America. Additionally, continued research in insect traps and development of vaccines and treatments for livestock could mitigate risk of infestation. One resource for information is the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension which researches and communicates best-practices in agriculture.

Keywords: Sterile insect technique; vaccines; Texas A&M AgriLife Extension

People are rightly concerned about the rapid growth of these projects when we don’t have a clear picture of the impact to the grid and water system. Data centers should pay their fair share for the infrastructure and resources they require to develop - not burden Texans. The University of Houston has researched, modeled, and synthesized data into recommendations for sustainable data center development.

Keywords: Not burden Texans, sustainable

Water conservation and fixing aging infrastructure will go a long way to ensuring Texans have enough water. Working with the Texas Water Development Board, we must invest in the most impactful infrastructure projects to conserve the water we already have and prudently manage our supply for the future.

Keywords: Conservation; infrastructure

Texas can improve grid reliability and lower costs by embracing our abundant, renewable sources of energy rather than using them as a scapegoat. This year, wind and solar power have helped us avoid scarcity even during extreme heat. We also need to modernize our energy transmission system and explore interconnection with national power grids to keep the lights on in our homes.

Keywords: Renewable energy; avoid scarcity

Fortunately, the proposed 15% NIH indirect cost cap was permanently blocked earlier this year. At the state level, it is important for the legislature to continue funding for our public universities to conduct research and maintain endowments that endure beyond the 2-year budget cycle.

Keywords: Fund public university research; maintain endowments

Unfortunately, bulwarks of public health are facing political attacks in our country. When engaging with communities that do have concerns, it is helpful to work with a trusted messenger in that community and to provide evidence-based education and resources calmly. I would support a narrowing of vaccine exemptions and require a higher threshold for the exemption to be granted.

Keywords: Trusted sources; evidence-based education

Scientific evidence supported with facts and expert input will be key to my policymaking process. When evaluating competing or uncertain claims, I would consider the sources of the data and try to understand the underlying data behind the claim. When scientific consensus and public opinion diverge, it is key to share scientific facts through a story or experience people can connect with. Scientists find the evidence, and good legislators use the information to construct policy and message the information to their constituents.

Keywords: Facts and evidence to support decisions

If we’re going to take this outbreak seriously, we must engage in cattle quarantines stop the spread of the infection as soon as possible. Additionally, we should restart the sterile fly program that we had been engaging in for decades to keep the infection at bay. This is going to require multi national cooperation. If we intend to push the outbreak back across the darien gap.

Keywords: Strict quarantines and a redeployment of our sterile fly program, along with serious multinational collaboration.

I personally am incredibly skeptical of much of the recent data center development happening across our state. In my opinion, most of this ai, and crypto related development will prove incredibly pointless in the long term. I believe that the future of ai is more efficient models , not more compute. And the future and present of crypto seems to be tax evasion and financial malfeasance. So I believe the policy of the state should be to be incredibly restrictive on data centers requesting high sums of power. The state should implement Power and water consumption per area caps on data centers. Limiting and cutting off the hungriest developments that plan from the beginning to be high energy , high water , use hyperscalers.

Keywords: Hyperscalers aren’t a necessary form of data center and should be legislated out of existence, data centers must have reasonable power and water usage from the beginning no exceptions required by the state.

We have to radically [address] the desertification of Texas land. It increases the chance of flooding and makes it so it is more difficult for the ground to absorb water and recharge our groundwater reserves. We must invest more in water purification and tighten up regulations on both water use laws and waste and runoff (ie. Industrial runoff, pesticides, etc.) laws across the state. If agriculture is going to play a meaningful portion, of stabilizing our water access we have to understand the different roles agricultural players play in the market. Many of the larger commodity croppers are much less concerned with water or land conservation and we must encourage and require that they shift away from water intensive crops and towards more sustainable forms of agriculture production. For the smaller players running on thin margins we need to incentivize and invest in easing the transition into more sustainable agriculture. Working to bring this industry away from monocropping to more holistic agriculture like Agroforestry.

Keywords: Fight desertification, tighten up water rights laws and invest in transitioning our farmers to a water efficient agriculture.

Oppose and put a stop to data centers. Encourage increased battery deployment along with incentives for more local grid and residential/communal solar battery deployment across texas to increase local backup and redundancy. Increased investment in transmission lines and transformers to allow more deployment of our incredibly cheap and abundant solar energy across more of our state.

Keywords: Less data centers, more batteries and solar, invest in local microgrids and transmission lines for increased deployment of cheap solar.

If this funding falls through, the first thing I would like to see is an increased tax on the incredibly profitable pharmaceutical and supplement industry and their product sales in Texas. With the proceeds going immediately back in to the same research institutions that so many of their products are derived from closing fully 300 million or gap or even increasing funding for our vital medical research. America has been at the front line of cutting-edge medical research, and it’s been an incredible asset for the people and this nation to know that we have access to some of the best care in the whole world and this isn’t something that we should ever allow to be lost or cut.

Keywords: Tax supplements and pharmaceuticals close three hundred million gap, fight to stay at the cutting-edge of medical research

One of the biggest issues we’ve seen in the rise of vaccine and medical skepticism in this nation is that there is an increase in anxiety around health at the same time that there is decreased access to actual medical professionals. Our healthcare system has pushed and pushed and pushed for doctors to be more productive and to get through more patients in a day, forcing them to spend less time with each individual patient. Combined, this would be high cost of healthcare and medical visits. There is a nationwide reticence for people with concerns or curiosities to reach out to the local medical experts that they trust. Our system, as it currently exists, is not designed to build an ongoing dialogue and relationship between doctors and patients, and so it has become very easy for concerned citizens to get there perspectives from online influencers with questionable credibility, given the ease of building a parasocial relationship with someone with hours and hours of online social media content. So I think at the heart of addressing this issue needs to be a reestablishment of local access to information and ongoing relationships with the medical experts on the ground in a lot of these communities. This means more doctors and making time for check ins not just checkups.

Keywords: Healthcare system focused on patient throughput, reestablish local relationships, medical experts

It is very important to me that accurate scientific evidence plays a strong role in our policy-making process. As for discerning between uncertain claims or competing claims I always believe that we should err on the side of consensus and replication. I believe that good science isn’t merely an experiment or a single piece of evidence, but a full comprehensive body of work that has been elaborated and expanded upon and tested rigorously over and over again. As for the divergence between public opinion and scientific consensus, the role of a politician and a leader is to help expand understanding and bring public opinion and sentiment in line with the evidence and the reality as it shifts. That is precisely the job that we as responsible leaders should be engaging in.

Keywords: Accurate scientific evidence, replication, comprehensive body of work, expand understanding, responsible leaders