Nov 3 ballot picks, Austin

Texas general election, Tuesday, November 3, 2026. Early voting through Friday, Oct 30, at any Travis County vote center.

Built for one central-Austin ballot: U.S. House 37, State House 48, State Board of Education 5, Austin ISD District 4, City of Austin. If you vote elsewhere, statewide races match; local ones may not. Check your own sample ballot at Travis County OmniBallot.

Federal

U.S. Senate
James Talarico (D)
The candidate I'm most excited about this cycle. Paxton is the corruption I'm voting against: impeached by the Texas House in 2023, acquitted by the Senate, and now carried by about $188M in outside GOP money.
Healthcare: Talarico wants Roe written into federal law and has fought the Texas ban's lack of rape and incest exceptions. In the Texas House he pushed the state to accept Medicaid expansion, and he proposes a Medicare buy-in for all ages. As AG, Paxton sued out-of-state doctors for mailing abortion pills into Texas, threatened hospitals in the Kate Cox case, and joined a multistate suit to overturn the Affordable Care Act.
Public schools: Talarico voted against the 2025 voucher law and offered an amendment to put it to voters instead. As AG, Paxton defended the program and sued school districts whose leaders discussed its effect on their schools.
Money & corruption: Talarico says he would ban super PACs, corporate PACs and congressional stock trading; LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman gave $10M in June alone to the main super PAC backing him. A Texas Tribune/ProPublica review found Paxton took nearly 1,000 trips with a state-paid security detail costing $3.3M, only 138 of them tied to state business. Texas is paying $6.6M to four aides he fired after they reported him to the FBI.
Checks & balances: Talarico says he will vote for a war powers resolution to stop the Iran war. Asked about funding the war, Paxton said "I'm supportive of what the president is doing."
Tech: Talarico's data-center plan would repeal the state sales-tax break, make big power users pay their own grid-hookup costs, and give local communities a say over projects. As AG, Paxton won two $1.4B privacy settlements from Meta and Google and has sued Netflix, WhatsApp and Discord. Elon Musk has put about $10M behind him.
U.S. House, District 37
Greg Casar (D)
My core reason to vote is restoring checks that Congress gave up, and the Iran war (no declaration, no congressional approval) is my example. A House seat is where that check lives.
Healthcare: Casar cosponsored the Women's Health Protection Act, which would override Texas's ban nationally, and the Medicare for All Act of 2023. I found no stated abortion position from Peña. She says she wants to "revitalize" Medicaid.
Checks & balances: Casar voted for the Iran war powers resolutions that failed 212-212 in May and passed 220-204 in September, and as Progressive Caucus chair he calls it an "illegal war". I found nothing on war powers from Peña.
Tech: Casar has written bills to regulate advanced AI, backs a ban on "surveillance pricing," and says data centers should be blocked if they raise power bills. Expect more regulation from him, not less. I found nothing on tech from Peña.

State executive

Governor
Gina Hinojosa (D)
My other headline pick. Former AISD board president who opposes the $1B voucher program and state takeovers of schools.
Healthcare: Hinojosa vows to end the ban. She coauthored the 2023 law letting insured Texans pick up a year's supply of birth control at once, and she wants every Texas child insured. Abbott signed HB 7 in 2025, which lets private citizens sue anyone who mails abortion pills into Texas for $100K or more, and signed a 2023 law extending postpartum Medicaid to 12 months; he has called Medicaid expansion "wrong for Texas".
Public schools: Abbott signed the $1B voucher law in May 2025, after spending about $12M in the 2024 primaries to oust House Republicans who had blocked it. Hinojosa would fire Education Commissioner Mike Morath, return taken-over districts to local control, and audit vendor contracts to raise teacher pay.
Money & corruption: Pennsylvania billionaire Jeff Yass, a leading voucher backer, gave Abbott $10M in 2023-24 and $1M more this summer. From July through September Abbott raised over $20M and Hinojosa over $13M; her largest donor was the American Federation of Teachers, at $250K.
Tech: Abbott hands out state semiconductor grants (two went to Austin companies this year), signed Texas's light-touch AI law, which also bars cities from passing their own AI rules, and froze H-1B hiring at state agencies and universities through May 2027. In August he paused new data-center grid hookups pending an audit. Hinojosa wants that pause to hold until the Legislature sets rules. She calls the H-1B freeze a dodge, since big corporate H-1B employers, Tesla and Oracle included, still get state tax breaks. I found no broader startup platform from either.
Lieutenant Governor
Vikki Goodwin (D)
Patrick runs the Texas Senate and has for three terms. Breaking one-party control is the checks-and-balances argument at the state level.
Healthcare: Goodwin would repeal the ban and proposes Texas Cares, a state-run insurance plan that includes Medicaid expansion, paid for partly by a tax on legal cannabis. Patrick's stated position is to preserve the ban, and he moved the 2025 abortion-pill bills through the Senate. On Medicaid expansion he said in 2025, "We are one of the states that did not go along with that Medicaid expansion and thank goodness."
Public schools: Patrick was an early champion of the voucher program that passed in 2025. Goodwin opposes vouchers and wants to raise the per-student basic allotment and tie it to inflation.
Money & corruption: In June 2023, as he prepared to preside over Paxton's impeachment trial, Patrick took a $1M contribution and a $2M loan from a pro-Paxton PAC funded mainly by Tim Dunn and the Wilks family. In early October he had $24M on hand to Goodwin's about $643K.
Tech: Goodwin wants a moratorium on new data centers and has raised AI-driven job loss. Patrick made the state bitcoin reserve a priority and has questioned the data-center sales-tax break.
Attorney General
Nathan Johnson (D)
The office Paxton ran. Johnson runs on restoring its nonpartisan work, and two former GOP-appointed Texas Supreme Court justices endorsed him. Middleton calls himself a "steadfast ally" of Trump.
Healthcare: The AG enforces the abortion ban. Johnson is openly pro-choice, has filed bills to repeal it and to protect Texans who travel for care, and voted against HB 7. Middleton pledges to "uphold pro-life laws," and Texas Right to Life endorses him.
Money & corruption: Middleton mostly pays his own way: more than 90% of the $11.8 million he raised in late 2025 was his own money, and his largest outside donor was voucher backer William Oberndorf ($50,000). Johnson raised about $650,000 in the same period. As senators, both sat as jurors at Paxton's impeachment trial. Only two Republicans voted to convict on any article, and Middleton was not one of them, though he reportedly considered it.
Tech: The AG also enforces Texas's AI law. Johnson would keep up Paxton's Big Tech lawsuits and review Texas AI law in his first 30 days. One example he gives is requiring employers to disclose when AI drives a firing. I found nothing on tech from Middleton.
Comptroller
Sarah Eckhardt (D)
The comptroller now runs the voucher program. Eckhardt wants to audit it and end no-bid contracts, which is the accountability I'm asking for.
Healthcare: Huffines wants "complete abolition" of abortion, with no exceptions, and wants the Comstock Act enforced against abortion pills. Eckhardt called HB 7 an "abortion bounty hunter law." She also wants the comptroller to show what refusing Medicaid expansion costs Texas, arguing the coverage gap makes everyone's insurance more expensive.
Public schools: Huffines took over the voucher program when Abbott appointed him in August, and he has asked lawmakers to double its base funding to more than $2 billion. Funding the waitlist too would cost about $4 billion over two years. State data shows 70% of families in the program were already in private school or homeschooling. Eckhardt would publicly report who benefits most, least or not at all.
Money & corruption: Huffines is largely self-funded: he loaned his campaign $10 million and got $3 million from his brother. His 2026 donors include Ryan LLC's PAC ($250,000), from a tax firm that helps corporations win tax breaks the comptroller manages, and Alpha School co-founder Mackenzie Price ($100,000). Eckhardt raised $394,531 in the first half of the year, and her largest donor gave $20,000.
Tech: The comptroller audits the data-center sales-tax break (20 of 138 exempt data centers audited so far) and runs the state bitcoin reserve. Eckhardt wants clear public reporting on who benefits from state incentives. I found no tech position from Huffines.
Railroad Commissioner
Jon Rosenthal (D)
French called for deporting 100 million people and polled followers on whether Jews or Muslims were the bigger threat. Rosenthal is a career oilfield engineer. This is the "morally repulsive" leadership I want gone.
Money & corruption: French's main backers are PACs funded by oil billionaires Tim Dunn and Farris Wilks, which supplied more than half his primary money. Dunn has now put nearly $500,000 behind him. Rosenthal outraised French last period, $488,000 to $439,000, mostly from small Texas donors plus $25,000 from Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker. The main oil trade group's PAC, ExxonMobil and Chevron gave to neither.
Tech: The commission regulates the gas that powers much of the grid, data centers included. Neither candidate has a stated data-center position.
Land Commissioner
Benjamin Flores (D)
Opposed the 2025 congressional redistricting and vouchers. Mostly a vote for checks on one-party control; I haven't dug into this race.
Healthcare: Texas Right to Life endorses Buckingham.
Public schools: Land office revenue feeds the Permanent School Fund, which holds over $57 billion and sends more than $2.4 billion a year to K-12 schools. Buckingham's campaign says the office has put nearly $6 billion into public education on her watch. Flores strongly opposes vouchers, arguing they undercut public lands' constitutional job of funding public schools. I found nothing on vouchers from Buckingham.
Money & corruption: Buckingham had $3.2 million on hand at midyear to Flores's $3,001. Her top donor this year gave $100,000; Flores's largest gift was $2,500 in kind.
Agriculture Commissioner
Clayton Tucker (D)
Open seat. Even outgoing GOP Commissioner Sid Miller urged voters not to back Sheets. I haven't dug into this race.
Healthcare: Texas Right to Life endorses Sheets.
Public schools: The agriculture department runs the National School Lunch Program in Texas. Sheets wants more clean, healthy, Texas-grown food in public schools. I found nothing on school meals from Tucker.
Money & corruption: Sheets raised $1.9 million in the first half of the year. His largest donors were Jim Moyer ($300,000), the Texas Republican Leadership Fund ($294,600), Abbott's campaign ($207,588) and the Texas Farm Bureau PAC ($178,904), and he has lent himself over $250,000. Tucker raised $264,673, led by the Eagles' Don Henley ($50,000). Both own stock with data-center ties: Sheets in developer Riot Platforms, Tucker in Energy Transfer, which he says he'll "probably" sell.
Tech: Tucker wants a data-center moratorium and day-one studies of the impact on farms, with water his main concern. Sheets wants data centers to pay into water and farm funds and to lose their tax breaks, but opposes a moratorium.

Legislature and schools

State House, District 48
Donna Howard (D)
Incumbent since 2006, focused on reproductive rights and higher-ed access. Her opponent has no public platform.
Healthcare: Howard was one of the House sponsors of the 2025 Life of the Mother Act, which clarified the ban's medical exceptions and is now law, and has filed rape and incest exception bills. She has chaired the Texas Women's Health Caucus and in 2025 filed a bill adding birth control to CHIP coverage, which died in committee. Gupta didn't answer any abortion question on his iVoterGuide survey.
Public schools: Howard voted against the 2025 voucher bill, voted to let voters decide vouchers statewide, and voted for the House school-funding and teacher-pay bill. She calls fully funding public schools her top priority. Gupta hasn't answered the state teachers' association's candidate survey.
Tech: I found nothing on tech from either candidate.
State Board of Education, District 5
Allison Bush (D)
Public schools over unlimited charter expansion, in line with the Hinojosa pick.
Public schools: Bush says the board should keep its veto over new charter schools and hold charters to the same rules as neighborhood schools. She calls recent curriculum and reading-list changes politically motivated and opposes teaching one faith over another. Arellano declined KUT's interview and hasn't answered the teachers' association survey; her platform calls for measurable standards and putting money in classrooms over bureaucracy.

Courts

All 11 contested appellate seats
The Democrat in each
Every Republican incumbent on the Texas Supreme Court is an Abbott appointee, and the new 15th Court of Appeals, which hears cases involving the state, is three Abbott appointees facing voters for the first time. Courts are the check I keep coming back to. Supreme Court: Ellis, Kelly, Kristen Hawkins, Triana. Court of Criminal Appeals: Anyiam, Riley, Taylor. 15th Court of Appeals: Zimmerer, Baker, Meyer. 3rd Court of Appeals Chief Justice: Byrne.
Healthcare: In 2024 (Zurawski) the Supreme Court ruled against women who sued after being denied care, holding that the ban's medical exception was broad enough. In 2023 it blocked Kate Cox's emergency abortion, and in 2024 it upheld the ban on gender-transition care for minors. Blacklock and Kyle Hawkins both litigated against the Affordable Care Act before joining the court.
Money & corruption: Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC gave $25,000 each to all four Republican Supreme Court justices on the ballot. Blacklock had $783,574 on hand in June to Ellis's $53,034. On the 15th Court, each Republican had $184,000 to $287,000 and each Democrat under $16,000.
Checks & balances: Chief Justice Blacklock and Justice Sullivan were each Abbott's general counsel before he put them on the court, though the court did turn down Abbott's request to remove Rep. Gene Wu. In 2024 Paxton ousted three Republican criminal-appeals judges who ruled he can't prosecute election cases on his own; he now backs his former counsel Thomas Smith against Anyiam, and Riley's opponent Kevin Yeary was the lone vote for Paxton in that case.

Local boards

Austin ISD, District 4
Jessica Neufeld
Austin Chronicle endorsement; runs on transparency with six years of PTA board work. I haven't dug into this one, and it deserves ten minutes of your own reading.
Public schools: Neufeld names vouchers, charter expansion and state takeovers as AISD's biggest threat and says more state funding is critical to the budget. Kim calls a possible TEA intervention the top challenge and wants to shrink the operating budget. Bradfield would cut central-office jobs before student services and tie the superintendent's pay to results.
Money & corruption: Per the district's 30-day campaign reports, Neufeld raised $36,164, including one $7,895 gift from an individual, versus $4,096 for Kim and $117 for Bradfield.
Austin ISD, At-Large 9
Pamela Mathai
Becker would set the AISD tax rate to $0 and steer students to charters. Soliz would be solid too, but I want fighters, and Mathai is one: a veteran classroom teacher who wants more state funding, opposes vouchers, and would resist a state takeover. The Austin Chronicle endorsed her too.
Public schools: Mathai calls state takeover AISD's biggest challenge and wants lawmakers to raise the basic allotment and fight vouchers. Soliz's top priority is limiting the damage from TEA action, whether takeover, conservatorship or monitoring. Becker says the state is "taking half our funding" and wants nonprofits to fund charter schools.
Money & corruption: Per the district's 30-day campaign reports, Mathai raised $22,117, Soliz $5,074 and Becker $11.48.
ACC Board, Places 1 and 3
Place 1: Gloria Gonzales-Dholakia. Place 3: Nan McRaven
Thin signal: Chronicle endorsements only. McRaven wants to keep the free-tuition pilot; her opponent would limit it. I haven't dug into this one.
Travis Central Appraisal District, Place 3
Yvonne Muñoz
Chronicle endorsement; the Chronicle calls both candidates qualified. Thin signal, and I haven't dug into this one.

City of Austin propositions

Every Austin voter gets A through J. A and B are bonds, which means the city borrows money and repays it with property taxes. C through J amend the City Charter, Austin's constitution.

Prop A, $260M parks bond (a tax increase)
Lean yes
What it does: lets the city borrow $260M for parks, rec centers, pools and open space across Austin, repaid through property taxes. There's no fixed project list, but the Austin Parks Foundation points to needs like Garrison Pool and Zilker Park.
Yes issues the bonds. No means the money isn't borrowed.
Cost: A and B together add about $40 a year on an average $495K home (KUT). The Chronicle puts the cap at $50 a year on a median $549K home, starting around $7.
Why lean: city staff and Mayor Watson wanted to wait two years, and some leaders point to unspent money from past bonds. I haven't dug into this one.
Prop B, $35M library bond (a tax increase)
Yes
What it does: borrows $35M: about $20M to renovate and expand the Hampton Branch at Oak Hill and about $15M for a new Colony Park branch in East Austin.
Yes issues the bonds. No doesn't.
Why: it's small and has named projects, unlike A. The same wait-two-years concern applies. I haven't dug into this one.
Prop C, independent redistricting commission
Yes
What it does: a citizen commission already draws Austin's council districts. This writes into the charter that the commission is independent of Council. It also lets the commission redraw after the city's boundaries change, widens the applicant pool, sets rules for filling vacancies, and lets staff talk to it within open-meetings law.
Yes adopts those changes. No keeps current language.
Why: maps drawn independently of the politicians who run in them are a check, and nobody organized against it.
Prop D, drop the weekly-meeting rule
No
What it does: the charter says Council must meet at least weekly. In practice it cancels about half those meetings and meets every other week. This deletes the requirement.
Yes deletes it. No keeps it.
Why no: the rule is a floor on how often Council meets in public, and the Chronicle also says no. Supporters say it just matches reality. I haven't dug into this one.
Prop E, Council rules no longer set by ordinance
No
What it does: Council now has to pass an ordinance, a formal law, to change its own meeting rules, such as how much time the public gets to speak. This lets it set those rules more informally.
Yes removes the ordinance requirement. No keeps it.
Why no: keeping rules like public-comment time in a formal process makes them harder to cut quietly. The Chronicle says no too. I haven't dug into this one.
Prop F, campaign-finance limit timing
Yes
What it does: Austin's contribution and spending limits get adjusted each year. This moves that adjustment to January 1 instead of budget adoption (usually August), and clarifies what counts as an "election."
Yes makes the change. No keeps current timing.
Why: housekeeping that keeps the limits current before each cycle. I care about money in politics.
Prop G, petition measures go to even-year November ballots
Lean yes
What it does: when citizens gather enough signatures to force a vote on an ordinance or charter change, it goes to the next May or November election. This sends those measures to the next even-year November ballot, when turnout is highest.
Yes makes the change. No keeps current timing.
Why lean: more people decide these measures. The cost is that some wait up to two years and get lost on a long ballot. Even the Chronicle split on it. I haven't dug into this one.
Prop H, Council appoints the City Attorney
Yes
What it does: the City Manager, who is hired rather than elected, currently hires and fires the City Attorney. This gives that power to Council.
Yes moves it to Council. No keeps it with the City Manager.
Why: the city's lawyer answers to elected officials who answer to voters. A similar measure failed 51 to 49 in 2012. I haven't dug into this one.
Prop I, mandatory outside efficiency audits (citizen petition)
No
Background: state law caps how much Austin can raise property-tax revenue each year without a public vote. Last November the city asked voters for more in Prop Q, about $110M a year, or roughly $300 for the average homeowner. Voters said no, 63.5% to 36.5%, after Save Austin Now led the opposition. The mayor then called for an efficiency review, and Council hired an outside firm, Public Works, to do one by ordinance.
What it does: requires an outside firm to audit city efficiency every five years and before any election to raise the tax rate. The firm has to find savings bigger than its fee, and the city has to publish how taxes and fees hit each income level.
Yes puts that in the charter. No leaves in place the efficiency review Council already started, which Council can change.
For: Save Austin Now, co-founded by former Travis County GOP chair Matt Mackowiak, plus attorney Bill Aleshire. More than 21,000 voters signed the petition. Aleshire cites a $580K Houston audit that found $100M+ in possible savings.
Against: six Council members, Rep. Casar, and the city workers' union. CM Fuentes estimates $5M to $10M+ per audit and says paying the auditor on findings is a conflict of interest.
Strongest case for yes: voters rejected the last tax hike by almost two to one, and Prop I makes the city show its work before it asks again. A regular audit is a reasonable discipline for a $6B city, and Houston's found real money.
Strongest case against: the charter locks in the method. The auditor has to find cuts bigger than its own fee, which pushes it toward recommending cuts whether or not they are wise. A required audit before every tax election adds cost and months of delay, and changing any of it takes another citywide vote. It also duplicates the review already under way, which Aleshire says Prop I would replace.
Why no: it doesn't ban tax increases, but it adds a costly, cut-seeking step that its backers, the group that beat Prop Q, have every reason to want in front of the next one. To me it seems like a GOP effort to just make it harder to support important expenses.
Prop J, charter cleanup
Yes
What it does: fixes typos, punctuation and grammar, and removes language that state law or court rulings already overrode. No policy change.
Yes cleans it up. No leaves it.