WeedVoter

Denise Wooten Democrat

Texas House, District 63

About this race: A district in the northern suburbs of Dallas-Fort Worth. The sitting member's recorded votes on the 2025 hemp-THC ban and the Compassionate Use Program expansion are listed on the race page in date order, with their record-vote numbers, as the official journals print them.

Whose record this page shows. The paragraph above is about the race, and part of it describes a different person. Everything after this line on this page is Denise Wooten’s own record and nothing else — including, where it says so, the finding that no record was located. No cannabis record is listed on this page for Denise Wooten, so where the paragraph above points at records, it is pointed at the race page and not at this one. Every record the paragraph above describes is set out candidate by candidate on the Texas House, District 63 race page.

Denise WootenDemocrat

No record compiled yet. Nothing on cannabis — no vote, bill, statement or endorsement — was found in any source we could read. 2 limits on that search are recorded with it.

What was checked for Denise Wooten, and the limits on it

Checked on 2026-09-18: the member-level rolls of every 2025 cannabis and hemp record vote in the official Texas House and Senate Journals — SB 3 and HB 46 in the regular session, SB 5 in the first called session and SB 6 in the second — including every Yea, Nay, present-not-voting, absent and statement-of-vote list, where this name does not appear because they hold no Texas legislative office; the author, joint-author, coauthor and sponsor tables of every cannabis, hemp, THC and Compassionate Use bill filed in the 87th, 88th and 89th Legislatures and the 2025 called sessions, at the Legislature's own bill-lookup service; and a press sweep including the Spectrum News report on the March 2026 Austin candidate forum on THC policy, which quotes six candidates by name and does not include them.

The candidate's own campaign site was read on 2026-09-20 at www.wooten-for-texas.com — found by search and confirmed to name this candidate before it was attributed to them. 9 pages were read: the homepage, any JavaScript bundle it loads, and the pages linked from it. None contains cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD or Compassionate Use.

⚠️This covers the reachable site, not necessarily the whole site: a page that nothing links to cannot be found this way, and at least one Texas candidate keeps their platform on exactly such a page.

Also checked on 2026-09-21: Ballotpedia, which has no article for this candidate under any spelling of their name that we could find.

The site's own sitemap was read on 2026-09-21, which reaches pages nothing links to. Their campaign site publishes a sitemap listing 38 page(s), of which 9 were read — the sweep skips assets and archive listings rather than prose — and none of those pages contains cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD or Compassionate Use.

⚠️This card does not tell you whether this candidate held a seat in an earlier Legislature, but the question is now narrower. Read on 2026-10-15, from each chamber’s own journal: the roll of members-elect that the Texas House Journal prints, district by district, on the first day of every regular session from the 75th Legislature (1997) through the 89th (2025), and every senator the Texas Senate Journal names with a district on the first day of every regular session from the 76th (1999) through the 89th.

For the 89th those are journals.house.texas.gov/hjrnl/89r/pdf/89RDAY01FINAL.PDF and journals.senate.texas.gov/SJRNL/89R/HTML/89RSJ01-14-F.HTM and every journal read is listed on this site’s corrections page. No one by this candidate’s name appears in any of them. That is narrower than a negative answer. Those rolls name the members seated as each session opened, and in most years the Senate’s names the senators who were not up for election by surname alone, so a member who sat only in earlier sessions, who arrived at a special election and was never named in full on a later first day, or who served under another name would not be found this way.

If this candidate is one of those, there may be a cannabis voting record this site is missing.

Also checked on 2026-10-05: the Texas Hemp Business Council’s published 2026 candidate questionnaire roster at texashempbusinesscouncil.com/wp-json/thbc/v1/candidate-responses and texashempbusinesscouncil.com/candidate-responses. The council is a hemp industry trade association; it put twenty questions about hemp and THC policy to 221 named candidates for the Texas Legislature and statewide office, this candidate among them, and publishes the answers it receives.

On the date checked the council’s own roster recorded this candidate’s status as "awaiting" and carried no answers from them; 30 of the 221 had answered by that date and this candidate was not one of them. The council states that answers are added as they are completed, so this records only what the roster showed on 2026-10-05.

This card has been corrected. What an earlier version of it said, and what was wrong with it, is published in the corrections log.

No score: this candidate has no recorded vote or bill authorship on a cannabis measure. Silence is not a position, so nothing is inferred from it.

Campaign sites and voter guides checked for Denise Wooten

Pages read in full:

  • onyourballot.vote411.org/m/race-detail.do?id=25712164 — sections on the page: Qualifications; Elections; Healthcare; Economy; Data Centers; Energy; Education; Affordable Housing — the question set the local League of Women Voters chapter wrote for this race, read in full by us on 2026-10-06. Not one of its questions asks about cannabis, hemp or drug policy. ⚠️Against every question this Candidate's entry reads "Candidate has not yet responded", so this records an unanswered questionnaire and not a silence of their own choosing. Their entry carries no occurrence of cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, hemp-derived, THC, thc-a, CBD, delta-8, delta-9, cannabinoid, dispensary, decriminalisation, psilocybin, Compassionate Use, consumable hemp, SB 3, Senate Bill 3, HB 1325 or HB 46.
  • www.wooten-for-texas.com their own site — sections on the page: Read 2026-09-20. No cannabis, marijuana, hemp, THC, CBD or Compassionate Use anywhere on the page.
  • communityimpact.com/grapevine-colleyville-southlake/election/qa-meet-the-democratic-candidates-running-to-represent-texas-house-district-63-in-denton-county — sections on the page: Community Impact's candidate Q&A for the March 2024 Democratic primary for this seat, published 2024-01-25, read in full by us on 2026-10-15 (HTTP 200). Under this candidate's name the page prints "Candidate did not respond to questionnaire before press time." and then prints answers to its questions. Nothing printed under their name contains, on a word boundary, cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, hemp-derived, THC, thc-a, CBD, delta-8, delta-9, cannabinoid, dispensary, decriminalisation, psilocybin, Compassionate Use, consumable hemp, SB 3, Senate Bill 3 or HB 46.
  • www.texasnorml.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/2024-Texas-Marijuana-Policy-Primary-Voter-Guide-by-Texas-NORML.pdf — sections on the page: Texas NORML's 2024 Texas Marijuana Policy Primary Voter Guide, read by us on 2026-10-15 (HTTP 200). Texas NORML put questions on cannabis policy to candidates in the March 2024 primaries and printed their answers. It lists this candidate among the Democratic candidates for Texas House District 63, and every answer box beside the name is empty, which the guide's own key defines as "Blank = Did not Respond". ⚠️The table is printed sideways, so the row was matched to the name by its position on the page, not by the order of the extracted text; the answers and comment printed on the neighbouring row belong to another candidate. This records an unanswered 2024 survey, not a silence of their own choosing.
  • www.crosstimbersgazette.com/2026/10/07/meet-the-candidates-texas-house-district-63 — sections on the page: The Cross Timbers Gazette's "Meet the Candidates: Texas House District 63", published 2026-10-07, read in full by us on 2026-10-17 (HTTP 200). It prints a short statement from each candidate in the race. The statement under this candidate's name is in their own words, and it names public education, medical and mental healthcare access, property taxes, reproductive choices, gun safety and air and water quality as priorities, but contains, on a word boundary, none of cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD, delta-8, cannabinoid, dispensary or Compassionate Use.

See the whole Texas House, District 63 race, including every opponent →

Who is paying for this campaign

Campaign finance — Texas Ethics Commission

Texas Ethics Commission filer 86104, filed as “Wooten, Denise”, treasurer appointment for State Representative, District 63, dated 2023-07-20.

Why there are no figures and no industry breakdown here. Texas does not require a candidate to report a contributor’s employer or occupation — the Commission’s own 2026 guide asks for the amount, the contributor’s name and address, and the date, and that is all. So there is nothing in these filings to group into industries, and we have built no such grouping rather than imply one. Separately, the Commission’s bulk filing archive tells automated readers to stay out of it, and we honour that, so we have read no individual Texas contribution record. Treat the itemised question as unchecked by us, not as checked and found empty.

Read this filer’s own reports at the Texas Ethics Commission (ethics.state.tx.us) → — choose Transaction Type “Contributions”, then Search By “Filer ID” and enter 86104. The Commission’s search posts its results, so there is no direct link to one filer’s page; the number above is what makes it one step instead of a hunt.

Any grouping of contributors into an industry is weedvoter’s own classification, applied to employer and committee names exactly as filed. The Commission publishes employers and committees; it never publishes industries. OpenSecrets discontinued its public interface in April 2025, so nothing here is an OpenSecrets classification.

Money received is not a position. Everything on this card is money that changed hands. It is not evidence that any contribution influenced any decision, nothing on it is placed beside a roll call, and we make no claim about anyone’s motive. For what Denise Wooten has actually done about cannabis, read the record above on this page — the roll calls, the bills that carry their name, and the date of each one, every entry linked to the document it came from. That is the part of this page built to be judged, and it is the part the score is calculated from. No contribution on this card moves that score by a cent.