New Analysis on Texas Races Finds Wide Ideological Gaps
WASHINGTON — (Feb. 17, 2026) — A new vote-record analysis finds sharp policy differences among candidates in both parties vying for Texas’ U.S. Senate seat, Attorney General, and other down-ballot races. Using research data from the national Institute for Legislative Analysis (ILA), the study measures how consistently Texas lawmakers vote in line with the national Republican Party platform, the clearest way to show which officials are most or least likely to align with the Trump Administration’s governing priorities.
Researchers pulled votes directly from legislative journals and compiled more than 28,000 recorded votes cast by 221 Texas lawmakers across the Texas Legislature and U.S. Congress. Votes were included only when they directly related to the issues and positions contained in the national Republican Party platform, and the same methodology was applied at both levels, enabling a head-to-head comparison of state and federal officials using one consistent standard.
The study found significant philosophical divides among Texas lawmakers in both parties, including high-profile battles between establishment-aligned incumbents and MAGA challengers. At the congressional level, one of the clearest contrasts is between Steve Toth (95.68%) and Dan Crenshaw (74.69%), and the data points to even sharper splits within the Texas Legislature as campaigns enter primaries.
In fact, some divides are so wide within each party that certain lawmakers effectively transcend partisan lines when evaluated under the same standard. State Rep. Ken King (59.89%), a Republican, and State Rep. Richard Raymond (56.84%), a Democrat, show only a narrow difference in overall alignment, underscoring how “moderate versus conservative” can sometimes be a more meaningful divide than “Republican versus Democrat.”
“In red states like Texas, it’s common during primaries for campaigns and PACs to cherry-pick a few votes and claim near-total alignment with Trump or conservatism,” said Ryan McGowan, CEO of the Institute for Legislative Analysis. “That misleads voters. Lawmakers should be judged on their full record – especially the major votes that actually shape governance – not selective storytelling designed to survive a primary.
Full results are available at GOPScorecard, an initiative published by the Institute for Legislative Advocacy, the 501(c)(4) arm that supports policy engagement and public education using the underlying research produced by ILA.
For media inquiries contact Ian Walters: iwalters@limitedgov.org.
###