Latest Update - April 10th
Senate Leadership Fund Not Focusing on Texas in General Election
The Senate Leadership fund – the PAC associated with US Senate Majority Leader Republican John Thune – announced their intentions this week to invest $342 million for the November election in 8 states in an attempt to maintain the Republicans’ slim majority in the US Senate. Texas was not included in the list of states targeted for investment. The PAC will focus on defending incumbents in Ohio, North Carolina, Maine, Iowa, and Alaska. The PAC will also make a push to flip seats held by Democrats in Michigan, Georgia, and New Hampshire.
According to a statement from the SLF, the group did not consider Texas as competitive – at least for now. And went on to say that, if need be, resources could be shifted to the eventual Republican nominee. The SLF and its aligned affiliates have already spent nearly $50 million to protect incumbent John Cornyn. Nothing was mentioned in the announcement or subsequent inquiries whether the PAC will continue its aggressive spending on Cornyn’s behalf for the runoff election.
The omission of Texas could be interpreted in different ways. Cornyn and his allies have long argued that he is the better candidate to represent the Republican Party in the November election and are hopeful the SLF will continue with its support through the runoff. Their argument continues to be that investing now to lock up Cornyn’s nomination will virtually ensure his reelection in the fall, thus saving the SLF from having to allocate future resources here in Texas that could be put to better use in more competitive states.
On the other hand – challenger Ken Paxton has consistently led in every poll done related to the head-to-head runoff election and there is a growing feeling among the SLF and the leadership in Congress that Cornyn will lose the runoff and there is no reason to continue to fund a losing cause.
Regardless of the initial omission of Texas for the fall campaign, the consensus among most Republicans – whether it be the Cornyn camp or Paxton supporters – is that Texas is not in play for the Democrats and either candidate should be able to prevail over Democratic nominee James Talarico.
President Trump seems to agree with that assessment, as detailed in the next segment. Weeks after saying he was likely to endorse in the race, he still has not chosen a favorite for the runoff. And many pundits believe that if Cornyn was going to receive an endorsement, it would have happened immediately after the March 3rd primary. Now, the President is focusing on Talarico. In addition to declaring that either Paxton or Cornyn would be able to defeat Talarico, Trump adds “any human being running against him, sick, incompetent, close to death, or even a child would win”.
Trump Remains on Sidelines of Cornyn-Paxton Senate Runoff
Looking further at Trump’s non-endorsement so far. Five weeks after teasing an endorsement in the runoff, President Trump has still not publicly backed either Cornyn or Paxton. After the deadline for the candidate not receiving a Trump endorsement to drop off of the May ballot passed, Trump’s inaction has only intensified the intra-party rivalry and kept the race wide open heading towards the May 26th runoff. Trump initially promised to make a decision “soon”, after the March 3rd primary, posting that the nomination battle “must stop now”. He urged the candidate he did not pick to drop out “for the good of the party”, but that promised endorsement has never materialized.
His endorsement has been viewed as potentially decisive because of his influence among Republican primary voters, especially in Texas, where he carried the state by 14 points in 2024. GOP strategists and political operatives have said that support from Trump could tip the balance in a very tight race. However, he has remained noncommittal as both campaigns have lobbied for his support. Cornyn has shifted his messaging to align more closely with Trump’s agenda and abandoned past stances in hopes of appealing to the president’s base. Paxton’s campaign has argued that he represents a “true conservative fighter” and has mobilized MAGA activists against any Republican endorsement of Cornyn.
Trump and his advisors reportedly discussed the race privately, and then reportedly Trump recently met with Paxton at a GOP fundraiser in Washington. Although Trump has avoided an outright endorsement, he has certainly weighed in on the race forcefully through social media. His blunt critiques reflect his broader frustration with Cornyn from past years, even though Cornyn has since courted his backing by aligning with key elements of the president’s policy agenda. Paxton continues to focus on Cornyn’s past criticism of a Trump candidacy and has also started a digital advertising campaign focusing on Cornyn’s inability to help pass the SAVE Act (requiring proof of citizenship when registering to vote) that shows a spoof video of Cornyn on vacation – instead of staying in Washington to “help further the Trump agenda”.
The winner will face Democrat James Talarico. Trump has not frequently mentioned James Talarico by name, but in early March, he called on the party to unify quickly ahead of November to beat the “Radical Left Opponent." In a social media post tied to his pending Senate endorsement, Trump referred to Talarico as someone the GOP “must totally focus on putting away.” It highlights his broader priority: regardless of his hesitation in the Republican runoff, he emphasized the importance of retaining the Texas Senate seat and avoiding intra-party fragmentation that could help Democrats in the competitive general election.
Trump’s continued silence has had strategic impacts. It has allowed the Cornyn-Paxton feud to intensify, with both camps targeting each other aggressively in ads and messaging. Some Republican insiders believe that Trump’s lack of endorsement has helped Paxton maintain momentum among grassroots MAGA voters. Others argue that Trump’s eventual pick – if it comes – could reshape the runoff dynamic, as believers in his brand may coalesce around whoever he chooses. With roughly seven weeks until the May 26 runoff, Trump’s decision – or rather, continued refusal – remains one of the most closely watched elements of the Texas Senate contest.
Another Poll Showing Paxton Leading
Another poll released this week shows Paxton continues to lead Cornyn. Washington based GQR – a public opinion research firm – surveyed 600 likely Republican primary runoff voters from March 19th-23rd and found Paxton the favorite of 47%, compared to 42% for Cornyn. What stood out more is that when Paxton’s voters were asked about their motivation to vote, they say they are a 10 on a 0-10 scale. Cornyn’s supporters averaged a commitment of 7-10 when asked about motivation. Cornyn’s negatives among primary voters relating to his positions on gun control, amnesty for undocumented immigrants, comments doubting President Trump’s electability in 2024 and support of former President Biden’s nominees before the Senate all drag Cornyn’s numbers into the low 40’s.
And finally, according to this particular poll, a Trump endorsement at this point in the race would have little to no effect on primary voters. If Trump endorses Cornyn, Paxton’s lead stays basically the same at 48% to 43%.
Paxton Under Scrutiny for Using Taxpayer Money for Hotel Rooms for Donors
Paxton is facing further criticism after recent reports revealing that public funds have been used to pay for hotel rooms that ultimately only benefited political donors and allies. The rooms were booked by the AG staff in conjunction with the Trump inauguration in 2025 and when Paxton’s office appeared before the US Supreme Court in defense of a state law requiring age verification when visiting adult websites.
The report has raised questions about ethics, use of taxpayer money, and accountability for those in public office. According to investigations, Paxton’s office reserved and paid for multiple hotel rooms using public funds in ways that appear to have benefitted individuals and consultants with political ties to the attorney general. Some of the rooms were used to host donors, supporters, or political allies during official or quasi-official events.
Critics argue that this practice blurs the line between official state business and political hospitality. Key questions have been raised, including whether public dollars were used for political or personal purposes, whether appropriate oversight/documentation had been provided, and whether the expenditures violate state ethics rules and campaign finance norms. The concerns have begun to surface amid ongoing scrutiny of Paxton’s administrative practices and spending discussions.
By law, taxpayer funds may not be used for political or campaign purposes. Allegations that state money was used to benefit donors hits at core issues of government integrity and accountability. Texas state law requires that public funds be spent for bona fide government purposes, so improper use of these funds could violate state procurement rules, ethics codes governing state officials, and campaign finance/lobbying regulations if the transfers benefitted political supporters.
Paxton’s critics – including political opponents and government watchdog groups – say this controversy reinforces broader concerns about cronyism and influence-peddling. In a competitive Senate runoff and potential future campaigns, ethical complaints can certainly be politically consequential. He has been a polarizing figure in Texas politics for years, in part due to multiple ongoing legal and civil litigation issues, allegations of misconduct involving donors/insiders, and historical controversies related to campaign practices. This scrutiny adds to a pattern of ethical debates surrounding his tenure.
Paxton’s allies defend his actions, saying that the lodging was tied to official duties and security concerns, all expenditures were properly documented in government records, and political attacks on the expenses are simply tied to partisan opposition. Opponents argue that taxpayer dollars should not facilitate perks for wealthy donors, there must be transparency and accountability, and the practice undermines citizens’ confidence in state government. At this stage there has been no conclusion that legal violations occurred, but the investigation is ongoing and the optics have drawn significant public and media attention.
Texas Positioned to Lose Over $1 Billion/Year to Tax Breaks for Data Centers
The state of Texas currently offers sales tax exemptions and related incentives to qualifying data centers, a policy that has grown rapidly alongside the state’s boom in cloud infrastructure and AI facility development. Due to these breaks, the state is now projected to forgo more than $1 billion in tax revenue each year, an estimated $3.2 billion over the next two years that otherwise would have gone into the general fund. These incentives work by exempting qualifying data centers from the state’s 6.25% sales and use tax on key purchases like electricity, cooling systems, emergency generators, servers, and related equipment, The exemptions can last 10-15 years depending on capital investment and project size; they are designed to attract high-investment tech infrastructure to Texas.
From the Comptroller’s Office: A qualifying data center is a facility of at least 100,000 square feet in Texas consisting of a single building that has been, or will be, specifically constructed to house servers and related equipment for processing, storing, or distributing data. The Comptroller’s office may certify single-occupant data centers that meet specific requirements related to capital investment and job creation. Items that have been deemed necessary and essential to the operation of one of these qualified data centers are those temporarily exempt from the state sales and use tax.
What began as a modest tax relief has exploded with the industry, as it grew much faster than anticipated. Lawmakers approved the tax break more than a decade ago, when data centers were smaller and required fewer resources. From 2014 to 2022, the total exemption amounted to between $5 million and $30 million in lost state revenue. The figure of $3.2 billion likely underestimates the total revenue to be lost over the next two years given the increase of new facilities being built. The tax break will already be one of the state’s costliest incentive programs, soon to be the most expensive of its kind in the entire nation. This growth has far exceeded early projections by the state, which initially expected the incentives to be worth about $180 million for the 2027-2028 budget period.
Communities across Texas have pushed back against data center incentives as citizens and local officials question whether these tax breaks will actually deliver on promised economic benefits. In Fort Worth, there has been strong resident opposition and council debate which has forced a delay on a proposed tax break of a $1 billion data center project. Other local governments -- including Brazoria County -- have rejected tax incentives for large data center developments, which reflects the growing concern over the tradeoffs between subsidizing private infrastructure and supporting local services.
Opposition stems from multiple fronts. “These new numbers are extremely concerning, and I will say they’re unsustainable, I plan to look at filing legislation to either repeal the exemption or take a very close look at it and see.” said Sen. Joan Huffman, chair of the Senate Finance Committee. Transparency and equity concerns emerge as critics argue that tax breaks benefit large global tech firms while reducing funding for schools, roads, and community needs. Some lawmakers and watchdog groups question whether the long-term revenue is justified by the relatively few permanent jobs that data centers create. Obviously, there are ongoing debates over water usage, electricity demand, and strain over local power grids.
Lawmakers say they are already considering proposals to limit the tax break or get rid of it altogether. The Texas Senate Finance Committee and House interim hearings are expected to study data center incentives ahead of the 2027 Legislative session, with some lawmakers advocating for safeguards or reform to ensure that Texans can capture a fair share of the economic benefit. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and other Republican leaders have also expressed concern over the ballooning cost of the incentive program. They have directed committees to review and make recommendations on future policy changes. The studies may consider whether the incentives thresholds should be tightened, how local governments negotiate abatements, and how to properly balance tech investment with environmental and infrastructure priorities.
Texas Going Solo on Psychedelic Drug Research
Texas is now moving forward with state-funded psychedelic drug research, most notably, the clinical trials of ibogaine, after unsuccessful efforts to secure private sector funding. Ibogaine is a powerful psychoactive compound classified as a Schedule I drug under federal law and currently illegal for general use in the US. It has drawn growing interest as a potential treatment for addiction and mental health disorders. The Legislature originally approved $50 million in taxpayer funding for a public-private partnership to study the drug, but after private pharmaceutical partners declined to participate, Texas must proceed largely on its own.
Ibogaine is a naturally occurring psychoactive substance derived from the root bark of the Tabernanthe iboga plant, native to West Africa. It is traditionally used in spiritual ceremonies, producing intense, long-lasting psychedelic experiences. In the modern medical context, ibogaine has gained attention for its potential to reduce opioid withdrawal symptoms and interrupt addiction cycles for substances like heroin, fentanyl, alcohol, and methamphetamine. It is also being studied for its connection to treat PTSD, depression, and traumatic brain injuries. It is unlike other psychedelics that primarily affect serotonin receptors but instead acts on multiple neurotransmitter systems (dopamine and opioid receptors). This is why researchers believe it has a unique impact on addiction pathways.
Ibogaine is currently classified as a Schedule I drug under federal law, meaning it is considered to have high abuse potential and currently no accepted medical use in the United States. That classification means that ibogaine is significantly restricted in the world of research and clinical testing. It also carries serious safety risks, such as cardiac arrhythmias, deaths, and requires careful medical supervision during administration. These risks and regulatory barriers are why major pharmaceutical companies have been hesitant to invest heavily in ibogaine development.
However, rather than abandon the research effort, Texas plans to move forward on its own. Using the $50 million state investment and partnerships with academic institutions – such as the UT Health Science Center Houston and the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston – Texas will lead clinical trials focusing on addiction, PTSD, and other behavioral health conditions. State officials have stated that Texas intends to fully fund the projected $100 million research effort, though details on securing the additional funds remain fluid and in question.
The decision to move forward highlights a growing state-level interest in therapeutic psychedelics as potential treatments for addiction and mental health issues where conventional options have fallen short. It also emphasizes private sector caution around federal regulated psychedelic drug development, especially given how long and risky the FDA drug approval process can be. The willingness by state leaders to use public funds to pursue research that may never be supported by drug companies or without federal policy changes shows the aggressive interest by Texas.
Texas has now positioned itself as one of the first states to heavily invest in psychedelic drug research, independently of private partners. This is a rare path that underscores both the promise of these drug treatments and the deep skepticism associated with it. The outcomes in Texas have the potential to significantly influence how other states and/or the federal government approaches psychedelics in the medical field in the future.
GOP Nominee Expresses Opposition to Border Wall in Big Bend
A pro-environment, anti-border-wall protest in Austin last weekend brought bipartisan attention to what has become one of the most controversial border security flashpoints in Texas: a proposed border wall segment through the Big Bend National Park. The event drew a large, predominantly liberal crowd. However, Brandon Herrera – the Republican nominee for Congressional District 23 -- stood out by earning applause for rejecting the proposed wall in that region. Organizers of the Austin protest focused on environmental concerns about broader infrastructure in ecologically sensitive areas, potential impacts on wildlife and water flow, and calls for alternative border security approaches that avoid intrusive physical barriers.
The crowd was largely environmental activists and progressive advocates who oppose physical wall structures along the Texas-Mexico border. Amid the backdrop, Herrera – running in the district affected by the proposed path of the wall -- known for his conservative credentials and pro-border security stances, took an unexpected position. He declared, “Nobody wants the wall in Big Bend,”, which was met with applause from the crowd. He also gained attention from social and traditional media, as his stance cut across expected party lines. His position diverges from broader GOP messaging that historically has backed border wall construction, instead emphasizing community consensus and environmental stewardship.
The proposal to construct a physical barrier through Big Bend has drawn opposition from a wide spectrum of stakeholders. From the environmental standpoint, Big Bend is home to fragile ecosystems, including critical wildlife migration paths for species like mountain lions, ocelots, and Mexican wolves. A wall would disrupt this movement, alter natural water runoff patterns, and affect river habitats along the Rio Grande. Conservation groups also believe that the infrastructure could damage archaeological sites and landscapes central to regional heritage. Outdoor recreation advocates warn that access to public lands would be restricted or diminished.
However, supporters of the wall argue that physical barriers are part of layered border security effort and will deter illegal crossings. Opponents argue that technology, enforcement strategy, and targeted operations are more effective without the significant ecological cost. Herrera’s stance matters because Texas has always been a central battleground in national border policy debates, where physical walls have become symbolic of broader ideological divides. A Republican publicly opposing a wall segment, especially one backed by federal funding and proclaimed as “border security infrastructure” – highlights interfaith and intraparty disagreements within the GOP.
Environmental and progressive groups have praised Herrera’s remarks as a rare crossover acknowledgement by a Republican on environmental and community grounds. They have continued to push for legislative and administrative opposition to large-scale walling in national parks. Conservative and border security advocates have expressed disappointment or surprise at the statement, arguing that any reduction of physical infrastructure could weaken border deterrence. State officials differ, with some pushing for border reinforcement and others pushing for localized solutions based on geography, ecology, and community input.
Texas Gas Price Tracker and TSA update
And now, more on the ongoing and evolving fuel price hikes and their effects on our everyday lives.
As of April 9th, 2026, national and state fuel price averages continue to increase. The statewide average for regular unleaded in Texas now sits at approximately $3.87/ gallon, slightly higher than last week’s average at $3.80/gallon. Just a month ago, state averages for regular fuel sat at $3.13/gallon. The numbers, expected to continue to rise, are seeing about a 6.1 cent increase week-over-week. Most metro areas show a 3-10 cent/gallon increase compared with seven days ago, but outliers like El Paso and Corpus Christi remain above $4/gallon for regular fuel. Diesel and mid-grade fuels are increasingly elevating, as diesel has now reached the highest average price ever recorded across Texas, at $5.37/gallon.
The highest recorded average price for regular unleaded in Texas happened in June of 2022, at $4.70/gallon. The national average currently sits at about $4.17/gallon. Below is listed the major Texas metro area averages as of April 9th.
Austin/San Marcos: $3.96/gallon
Houston: $3.87/gallon
Dallas: $3.83/gallon
San Antonio: $3.95/gallon
El Paso: $4.01/gallon
Corpus Christi: $3.97/gallon
Beaumont/Port Arthur: $3.81/gallon
As the 2026 Iran War continues to disrupt global energy markets, including through blockages of the Strait of Hormuz threatening up to 20% of global oil transit, West Texas oil production has emerged as a critical stabilizing force for American energy supplies. Despite broad geopolitical risk and sharply higher prices, the Permian Basin and other West Texas fields posted record output last year. Currently, the output is helping blunt the worst of the supply shock.
In 2025, the US produced a record 13.6 million barrels of crude oil per day, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). About 6.6 million barrels per day – nearly half – came from the Permian Basin in West Texas and southeastern New Mexico. Remarkably, this record output occurred despite a much smaller rig count and fewer new wells drilled. It highlights improved operational efficiency and enhanced oil recovery techniques. Industry leaders say that without this robust production, US gasoline and diesel markets would feel much greater pressure from global supply disruptions related to the conflict.
Not only has the Iran War triggered sharp increases in global crude prices, it has also heightened fear of a sustained energy crisis. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz and disruption of key oil routes have strained global supply, raising costs for petroleum products. Saudi and OPEC partner production cuts along with Middle East tensions have contributed to crude jumping above $100 per barrel. Record domestic output centered in West Texas has acted as a partial counterweight to global supply loss, reducing the need for larger imports and alleviating some volatility in US markets.
However, while the increase in Texas production has provided a stabilizing cushion, the US remains vulnerable in several ways. Markets remain global and interconnected, meaning disruptions in the Middle East quickly reverberate in American fuel prices and supply chains. Domestic producers, however large, cannot fully replace all foreign supply in the short term. Despite the high output, consumers are still expected to face higher gas and diesel costs. The record output from West Texas does help ease reliance on foreign oil, but higher crude prices due to geopolitical risk still transfer into pump price increases.
Industry analysts note that Texas’s role as a production powerhouse does provide the nation with more leverage and resilience than others; however, it does not make the country completely immune to the effects of the global supply interruptions.
As for TSA & airport operations, during the partial government shutdown, TSA officers went without pay for weeks, leading to staffing shortages and hours-long security lines at major airports. To cope, airport officials restricted TSA PreCheck to select terminals and consolidated security lanes on some days. ICE agents were deployed to assist with TSA operations, which have been mostly drawn back. After back pay was restored to TSA employees in late March, lines have begun to return to normal levels at major hubs nationwide. Many are reporting 15–30-minute waits instead of multi-hour queues; airports are still advising travelers to time their arrivals appropriately, generally 90 min to 3 hours before departure to avoid unnecessary congestion from early arrivals.
However, fuel price spikes – particularly jet fuel surging far above typical levels amid global oil disruptions – are now affecting airline operations and costs for travelers. American Airlines has raised checked baggage fees for the first & second bags by $10 each, and higher for third bags. They are also adding a small surcharge for basic economy travelers beginning in May. Southwest Airlines has increased its checked baggage to $45 for the first checked bag, and $55 for the second checked bag, a $10 increase from previous rates. This comes less than a year after Southwest ended its longtime perk of two free checked bags and open seating.
Similar fee hikes have also been adopted by Delta, United, and JetBlue to help offset soaring jet fuel costs. Airlines have begun to adjust schedules and trim down less profitable flights, especially budget and redeye routes, to balance costs with demand. Higher fuel costs and operational constraints are contributing to canceled flights and fewer available seats. Elevated jet fuel prices are expected to push airfare hikes for spring and summer travel as carriers continue to pass extra costs onto consumers. Airline industry data shows that airfares have already climbed sharply in 2026, with prices for some domestic routes more than doubling within recent weeks.
Political Notes
Republican Lt. Governor Dan Patrick stressed the unease that Republicans are feeling for the midterms this week when he told a gathering of conservative policy makers that the Texas House is in jeopardy of flipping control to the Democrats. The Republicans currently hold 88 seats in the 150 member House, meaning the Democrats would have to flip 14 seats to gain control. In the 2018 – during Trump’s first midterm election – Democrats flipped 12 seats in the House. Patrick went on to say that whoever loses the Republican nomination for the US Senate must set aside their differences and support the nominee in the November election against Democratic nominee James Talarico.
One thing that continues to go in Cornyn’s favor is the money race. His campaign reported this week that he has raised nearly $9 million in the first three months of 2026, with $3 million coming since the March 3rd primary. This represents $3 million more than he raised in the last quarter of 2025. Cornyn now has $8 million cash on hand for the final weeks leading up to the runoff. The Paxton campaign has not released fundraising figures for the first quarter of this year.
The National Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee has released their initial list of target races where they will be working and providing financial support to defend incumbents as well as try to flip seats currently held by Republicans. In Texas, the committee will be working to defend seats currently held by Rep. Eddie Morales of Eagle Pass and Rep. Mihaela Plesa of Plano. These are also priority targets for the Republicans to flip. Morales faces a rematch against Republican Robert Garza, who is the former mayor of Del Rio. Morales defeated Garza by a slim 3-point margin in 2024. Plesa faces attorney and former Collin County Republican Party chairman George Flint in November. Plesa won reelection in 2024 over Republican Steve Kinnard by four points.
The committee will also support Democratic nominee Kristian Carranza as she faces Republican Jorge Borrego in an open seat in San Antonio. Incumbent Republican John Lujan chose to run for Congress and did not seek reelection to the Texas House. Lujan defeated Carranza by a slim 2 ½-point margin in 2024.
What’s Next??
The House Administration Committee meets later today to consider sanctions against House Democrats that broke quorum last summer to delay a vote on the state’s proposed rewrite of the Congressional Districts. We will have a full report on next week’s update.
We will also have an update on the House State Affairs hearing from yesterday regarding data centers and their stress on the state’s electric grid.
The Senate Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs Committee has scheduled a meeting for May 11th, and the Senate Finance Committee has three scheduled meetings this summer to further discuss interim charges.
Now the campaigns for the runoffs begin. The runoff election is Tuesday, May 26th.