Texas Republicans have controlled the governor’s office since 1994. Republicans have also held a majority in the Texas Senate since 1997 and the Texas House since 2003. In other words, Texas has had decades of relatively uninterrupted Republican control of state government. That matters when evaluating the state's problems because many of the policies affecting Texans’ health care, schools, electricity, taxes, insurance and local governments are not decisions being made in Washington. They are decisions being made in Austin.
That does not mean every problem in Texas is the fault of one political party. It would be intellectually dishonest to pretend otherwise. Weather affects insurance costs. Population growth affects housing and electricity demand. Inflation affects school budgets. Federal policies affect Medicaid and health care. Markets matter.
But the reverse is also true: when a political party has controlled state government for decades, it is reasonable to ask what that government has actually accomplished—and what problems remain unresolved.
The question should not be, “Is Texas red or blue?”
The better question is: Are the policies being pursued by Texas government producing good results for Texans?
Health Care: Texas Made a Choice Not to Expand Medicaid
Perhaps the clearest example is Medicaid.
Under the Affordable Care Act, states were given the option to expand Medicaid to adults with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level. As of May 2026, 41 states, including Washington, D.C., have adopted the expansion. Texas is one of the 10 states that have not.
This isn't simply a federal-versus-state argument. The Supreme Court's 2012 decision made Medicaid expansion optional, meaning Texas policymakers have repeatedly had the authority to decide whether to participate.
The consequences are measurable.
KFF estimates that approximately 1.2 million uninsured people across the 10 non-expansion states fall into the Medicaid “coverage gap”—earning too much to qualify for their state's traditional Medicaid program but too little to qualify for ACA Marketplace subsidies. Texas has the nation's lowest Medicaid income eligibility threshold for parents: a family of three earning more than approximately $4,098 annually is above the state's parent eligibility limit. Adults without dependent children generally cannot qualify for Medicaid based solely on low income.
And the broader difference is significant. KFF reports that states that have not expanded Medicaid have an uninsured rate of 14.5%, compared with 8.0% in expansion states.
Texas also continues to perform poorly on several health-system measures. The Commonwealth Fund's state data show Texas' maternal mortality rate at 34.7 deaths per 100,000 live births, compared with 26.3 nationally.
To be fair, Texas has made some positive changes. The state extended Medicaid postpartum coverage to 12 months, an important improvement for new mothers. But that does not erase the larger coverage problem created by remaining a non-expansion state.
That distinction matters. Good policy should be acknowledged when it happens—even when you disagree with the people who enacted it.
Electricity: The Texas Grid Is Not an Accident
The Texas electricity market provides another example of why state policy matters.
Texas intentionally built a distinctive electricity market based heavily on competition and relatively limited regulation. In 1999, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 7, restructuring the state's electricity industry and deregulating electricity generation and retail competition in parts of the state. Texas law still explicitly states that electricity production and sale are not considered a monopoly requiring traditional regulation of rates, operations and services.
That doesn't mean every problem with the Texas grid was caused by deregulation. The 2021 winter storm, for example, involved extreme weather, failures across multiple parts of the energy system, natural-gas supply problems, generation outages and other factors.
But the structure of the electricity market is absolutely a state policy choice.
And Texas is now confronting another enormous challenge: electricity demand is growing rapidly. Data centers, industrial projects, population growth and other large electricity users are creating enormous new demand. ERCOT has responded by changing how large users connect to the grid, including a new process for studying projects of 75 megawatts or more so that new demand can be matched with available capacity and necessary transmission upgrades.
The important question isn't whether Texas should have a competitive electricity market. That's a legitimate policy debate.
The question is whether the state is adapting that market quickly enough to keep electricity reliable and affordable as Texas grows.
Taxes: No State Income Tax Doesn't Mean Texans Don't Pay Taxes
Texas is famous for not having a state individual income tax. But the absence of an income tax doesn't mean Texans don't pay taxes—it means the state relies more heavily on other revenue sources, including property and sales taxes.
Property taxes have become a particularly important political issue.
In 2025, Texas lawmakers approved more than $51 billion in property-tax cuts through the state budget and related legislation. The new laws raised the standard homestead exemption to $140,000, with a $200,000 exemption for homeowners who qualify because of age or disability.
That is a substantial tax cut, and homeowners who receive it should absolutely be allowed to count it as a benefit.
But there is another side to the equation: property taxes are a major source of funding for local governments and public schools. When the state reduces property-tax revenue, policymakers have to consider how schools, cities and counties will maintain services and replace lost revenue.
So again, the issue isn't simply “tax cuts are good” or “tax cuts are bad.”
The question is: Who pays less, who pays more, and what happens to the public services those taxes help fund?
Homeowners Insurance: A State Problem With State and Non-State Causes
Homeowners insurance offers another example of why policy debates need more nuance.
Texas homeowners have faced steep increases in insurance costs. According to the Texas Department of Insurance, statewide homeowners insurance rate changes averaged 21.1% in 2023 and another 18.7% in 2024.
Those increases cannot fairly be blamed entirely on Texas lawmakers.
Texas has hurricanes, hail, tornadoes, wildfires and other severe weather. Construction and repair costs have increased. Population growth means more homes and more property exposed to risk. Climate-related changes can also affect insurance losses.
But state regulation still matters.
Texas lawmakers control the state's insurance regulatory framework, and they have debated measures intended to increase oversight of rate increases, improve consumer protections and reduce the risks that make insurance more expensive. The difficulty is finding a balance between protecting consumers and maintaining an insurance market in which companies are willing to continue writing policies.
That is precisely why this issue shouldn't be reduced to partisan slogans.
Texas homeowners don't care whether the insurance company or the Legislature has the better talking point. They care whether they can afford to insure their homes.
Public Education: A Major Investment Doesn't Erase Years of Decisions
Education provides perhaps the clearest example of why the phrase “Texas is doing great” requires context.
In 2025, the Legislature approved approximately $8.5 billion in new public-school funding. The package included money for teacher and staff pay, special education, school operations, safety, educator preparation and early learning. The Texas Education Agency describes it as the largest one-time public education investment in recent memory.
That investment deserves to be recognized.
But it also came after years in which the basic per-student funding formula had remained stagnant. The Texas Tribune reported that districts had experienced six years of stagnant base per-student funding while inflation and other operating costs increased.
And even after the $8.5 billion investment, school districts continued reporting serious financial pressures. In 2026, Texas school leaders told lawmakers that districts were still facing budget problems, with some eliminating positions or closing campuses.
That doesn't mean the $8.5 billion was meaningless. It means public policy should be judged by outcomes over time, not simply by the size of a single legislative appropriation.
Vouchers: A New Policy Choice Texans Can Now Evaluate
Texas also made a major change to education policy by creating a statewide school-choice program.
The Texas Education Freedom Accounts program, established through Senate Bill 2 in 2025, allows eligible families to use state funds for approved educational expenses, including private-school tuition, tutoring, career and technical education and certain homeschool expenses.
The program launched for the 2026–27 school year. By June 2026, more than 102,000 students had been awarded accounts, while nearly 145,000 remained on the waitlist.
Supporters see this as an expansion of parental choice. Critics worry about the implications for public-school finances and whether public money should subsidize private education.
Both sides can make legitimate arguments.
But now that Texas has made the policy choice, the debate can move beyond ideology and into measurement.
What happens to public-school enrollment?
What happens to student achievement?
Who benefits financially?
How much does the program cost taxpayers?
Do students who leave public schools experience better outcomes?
And does the program improve educational opportunity for low-income families, or primarily subsidize families who were already choosing private education?
Those are empirical questions. Texans should demand the data.
Local Control: Austin Has Increasingly Limited What Cities Can Do
Another issue that deserves more attention is the relationship between the state and local governments.
Texas has increasingly used state law to limit the authority of cities and counties to regulate certain issues. Housing is one particularly important example.
During the 2025 legislative session, lawmakers considered and enacted measures affecting municipal authority over residential development, zoning and occupancy. For example, Senate Bill 15 addressed residential lot size and density requirements in certain municipalities, while Senate Bill 1567 addressed municipal regulation of residential occupancy.
Whether those restrictions are good policy is debatable.
But the larger political point is not.
When the state Legislature restricts what cities can regulate, it becomes harder to blame local governments for every problem occurring within their borders.
If Austin, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio or another Texas city is limited by state law in what it can regulate, then state lawmakers are part of the policy equation.
You cannot simultaneously argue that Texas cities should be held responsible for local outcomes while repeatedly limiting their ability to make local policy.
Housing: Texas Is Building, But Not Necessarily Fast Enough for Demand
Texas has long benefited from comparatively lower housing costs than many coastal states. But that advantage has been eroding.
A 2025 analysis cited an estimate from housing policy organization Up For Growth that Texas needed approximately 320,000 additional homes to meet housing demand. Despite Texas building more homes than any other state, population and economic growth have created demand faster than supply in many markets.
That shortage matters because housing economics are straightforward: when demand grows faster than supply, prices and rents face upward pressure.
Texas lawmakers have increasingly focused on housing supply and local regulations, including efforts to limit certain local development restrictions.
Again, reasonable people can disagree about the best solution.
But the affordability problem demonstrates why state policy matters. Decisions about zoning, density, development regulations, property taxes and infrastructure all influence how much housing can be built and what it costs.
The Bigger Picture
None of this proves that every Republican policy is bad.
It doesn't.
Texas has experienced tremendous population and economic growth. The state has attracted businesses and residents from around the country. Lawmakers have made substantial investments in public education, increased the homestead exemption, expanded postpartum Medicaid coverage and taken steps to address the electricity grid and housing supply.
Those accomplishments should be acknowledged.
But acknowledging them does not require Texans to stop asking questions.
If anything, decades of one-party control make accountability more important—not less.
A political party that has controlled the governor's office since 1994, the Senate since 1997 and the House since 2003 has had ample opportunity to shape the state's direction.
So when statewide Republican candidates gather to “chart the course to victory,” Texans should ask a very simple question:
What course?
A course toward what measurable outcomes?
More affordable health care?
A lower uninsured rate?
A reliable and affordable electric grid?
More affordable homeowners insurance?
Better-funded and better-performing public schools?
More affordable housing?
Sustainable local government finances?
Those are the metrics that matter.
Political victories are not the same thing as policy victories.
And party labels are not substitutes for results.
If Texas Republicans believe their policies are working, they should welcome an evidence-based comparison. Show Texans the numbers. Show us where the state has improved, where it has fallen behind, what policies produced those outcomes and what you intend to do differently where the results aren't good enough.
Because government isn't supposed to exist simply to preserve a political party's hold on power.
It is supposed to work for the people who live here.
After nearly three decades of one-party control, Texans are more than justified in asking whether the state's political leadership is working for us—or simply working to remain in power.
