WeedVoter

Janet Tycelia Dudding Democrat

Texas House, District 14

About this race: The sitting member's recorded votes on the 2025 hemp-THC ban and the Compassionate Use Program expansion are listed below 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 Janet Tycelia Dudding’s own record and nothing else — including, where it says so, the finding that no record was located. Every record the paragraph above describes is set out candidate by candidate on the Texas House, District 14 race page.

Janet Tycelia DuddingDemocrat
100/100 support for legal access — top band, 67 to 100 moderate — three to five records produced this number · 4 of 4 records scored
How this score is worked out

Seven kinds of act move this number, and they do not count equally. A recorded vote counts 3, and so does authoring a bill or signing an executive action; signing on to somebody else’s bill counts 2. A statement or a questionnaire answer counts 2 as well, and an organisational endorsement counts 1. A vote takes its direction from the bill, whose effect is set out in advance; the rest take it from our reading of what was said, and each one below shows that reading and the reason for it. Acts shown with no number were examined and deliberately left out of the arithmetic, with a reason given.

  • 2026-09-11 questionnaire — Answered that she supports moving Texas toward a legal, regulated cannabis market including adult-use THC products, with a reasonable excise tax on adult-use sales and no tax on medical cannabis, and "Strongly Support" on maintaining a legal hemp marketplace, counted as +2 at weight 2
  • 2026-02-16 statement — Platform plank calls for decriminalising, legalising, regulating and taxing adult-use THC, counted as +2 at weight 2
  • 2026-02-13 questionnaire — Named decriminalisation, taxation and regulation of adult-use THC as a legislative priority in her own words, which is a position for changing the law rather than a description of it. Scored the same as other candidates in this guide who stated support for taxing and regulating adult-use THC. She has no voting record on this because she has not held this office, counted as +2 at weight 2
  • 2022-01-27 statement — Earlier statewide campaign platform called for legalising or decriminalising adult-use recreational cannabis, counted as +2 at weight 1.2

Average on the −2 to +2 scale: 2. Full method and the bill table.

  • Said2022-01-27

    In an earlier statewide campaign for Texas Comptroller, published an issues page whose first plank was headed "Legalize/Decriminalize adult-use recreational cannabis", reading: "Texas needs a new revenue stream to reduce property tax, fund education, health (& mental health) care, and public safety. A growing number of states are bringing in revenue by legalizing cannabis for adult recreational use. The industry is mature enough to have established best practices, which should be incorporated." and "Decriminalization saves the state $300 million in criminal justice costs and saves local property taxes.

    Licensing fees from the different areas of the cannabis industry is sufficient to fund enforcement. Distributing licenses for the new businesses should formally consider which communities have been most harmed by the decades-long marijuana incarceration protocol and the resulting impact of felony marijuana convictions on housing, jobs and families." The page is undated: 2022-01-27 is the earliest Internet Archive capture containing the text, a capture date and not a publication date.

    The same text is still present in a 2024-06-20 capture.

    web.archive.org, web.archive.org

  • Questionnaire2026-02-13

    Answered a candidate questionnaire published by Community Impact and named decriminalising, taxing and regulating adult-use THC twice, in answers to two questions that did not mention cannabis. Asked what projects are most important for the legislature to focus on, she gave a list of nine priorities, one of which was "THC-adult-use decriminalization, taxation & regulation" Asked what her priorities would be for the future of Texas education, she wrote that public taxes should go to public schools and added: "While we’re at it, let’s decriminalize and regulate adult-use THC to fund ISD employee’s social security AND TRS."

    The paper put the same questions to both Democratic candidates in the March primary and printed the answers it received; the other candidate, David Kessler, did not mention THC, hemp or cannabis anywhere in it. She went on to win the primary and is the party’s nominee for this seat in the November general election.

    communityimpact.com

  • Said2026-02-16

    Campaign issues page carries a plank headed "Decriminalize, Regulate & Tax THC" reading: "If I can step across the line into New Mexico and legally buy a $25 bag of gummies, I should not be a criminal one mile later." and "Decriminalize, Legalize, Regulate and TAX adult-use THC. In the enabling legislation, direct the revenue to public schools, healthcare, housing and real property tax reform." A linked detail page expands the plank, ending: "Treat adults like adults.

    Protect kids. Test the product. License the seller. Tell the truth on the label. And make the revenue work for Texas." The live page is undated: 2026-02-16 is the date of the earliest Internet Archive capture containing this text, a capture date and not a publication date.

    janetdudding4texas.com, janetdudding4texas.com, web.archive.org

  • Questionnaire2026-09-11

    Said she supports "moving Texas toward a legal, regulated cannabis market that includes hemp and adult-use THC products", in the Texas Hemp Business Council’s 2026 candidate questionnaire. The council is a hemp industry trade association; it put twenty questions to 223 candidates for the Texas Legislature and statewide office and publishes the answers it receives in full, without editing. These are the candidate’s own words, submitted by the candidate.

    Asked about the future of hemp in Texas, the answer was, in full: "I support moving Texas toward a legal, regulated cannabis market that includes hemp and adult-use THC products, with clear rules that protect consumers and treat adults like adults. Prohibition and half-measures have created confusion, unsafe products, and an uneven playing field for responsible businesses. Texas should require licensed production and retail sales, independent testing, accurate labeling, age restrictions, child-resistant packaging, and real enforcement against bad actors.

    Higher-dose intoxicating products should be sold only through tightly regulated retailers, not gas stations or convenience stores. I support a reasonable excise tax on adult-use sales, with revenue sharing written into law for local governments, public education including fine arts, public health, and oversight. Medical cannabis should be treated like healthcare, not a luxury good, and should not be taxed." Asked who should be permitted to sell THC, to whom, at what dose, in what form and subject to what safeguards: "Only licensed and regulated businesses should be allowed to sell THC products.

    Adult-use products should be sold only to adults 21 and older, and medical products only to lawfully authorized patients. Lower-dose products may be appropriate for licensed general retailers that meet strict standards, but higher-dose intoxicating products should be limited to tightly regulated specialty retailers. In all cases, Texas should require independent testing, clear potency and ingredient labeling, child-resistant packaging, batch tracking, recall authority, and strong enforcement.

    Intoxicating products should not be sold in gas stations, truck stops, or convenience stores." On keeping a legal, regulated hemp marketplace, the comments read: "I strongly support a legal, regulated hemp marketplace in Texas. The better approach is not prohibition, but clear rules that protect consumers, support legitimate businesses, and give law enforcement workable standards. Products sold to Texans should be tested, accurately labeled, age-restricted where appropriate, and sold only through licensed, accountable retailers."

    Asked why regulation is or is not preferable to prohibition: "Regulation is preferable because it promotes public safety, transparency, and accountability. If a product can be manufactured and sold safely, the state should require independent testing, ingredient disclosure, potency standards, packaging safeguards, and enforcement against bad actors rather than pushing demand into less safe channels. Texans are better protected by oversight than by blanket bans that create confusion and encourage unregulated sales."

    On the questionnaire’s fixed-choice questions: on maintaining a legal, regulated hemp marketplace, "Strongly Support"; on whether regulation is preferable to prohibition where a product can be made and sold safely, "Yes"; on hemp agriculture, "Strongly Support"; on retail regulation, "State license required for all cultivators, processors, distributors, testing labs, and retailers. Local business permit/license allowed for retailers and possibly on-site consumption businesses.

    No local power to override state product-testing standards. Local control limited to zoning, hours, density, signage, fire/building compliance, nuisance rules, and local public-safety enforcement. Uniform statewide safety rules so businesses do not face conflicting product standards city to city."; on tax policy, "Depends on the proposed tax"; on consumer choice, "Depends on the product or dosage". The date is the date the council recorded the submission, in Central time.

    texashempbusinesscouncil.com, texashempbusinesscouncil.com, texashempbusinesscouncil.com, texashempbusinesscouncil.com

See the whole Texas House, District 14 race, including every opponent →

Who is paying for this campaign

Campaign finance — Texas Ethics Commission

Texas Ethics Commission filer 83742, filed as “Dudding, Janet T.”, treasurer appointment for State Representative, District 14, dated 2026-01-14. The name on the filing is not word-for-word the name on the ballot — both are printed above so you can check the pairing yourself before you rely on it.

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 83742. 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 Janet Tycelia Dudding 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.