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.
- 2026-10-05 questionnaire — Her own answers ask in plain terms for the ban on hemp-derived THC to be removed and for a regulated lawful market, and she marked the strongest available support on the hemp marketplace and on hemp agriculture, so this is scored as support for lawful access, counted as +2 at weight 2
Average on the −2 to +2 scale: 2. Full method and the bill table.
-
Questionnaire2026-02-03
Answered the Dallas Morning News candidate questionnaire in its 2026 voter guide. The paper asked every candidate in the race: "How do you think the president’s executive order to reclassify marijuana as a Schedule III drug will affect THC regulation in Texas?" The answer given was: "It’s simple, it will cost our state billions of dollars in revenue. Unnecessarily."
This answer is shown but not scored: the question asks what the candidate expects to happen, and this reply describes an expectation without stating a position of their own on lawful access.
WeedVoter’s note — shown here, but deliberately left out of the score: A one-line answer about billions in revenue that does not make clear which way she would have it, so nothing is scored from it.
-
Questionnaire2026-10-05
Answered the Texas Hemp Business Council’s 2026 candidate questionnaire, saying the hemp business is good for consumers and farmers and that the ban on hemp-derived THC should be removed. The Texas Hemp Business Council is a hemp industry trade group; 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.
The council’s form records the name as "Julie Evand"; this guide uses the spelling on the Secretary of State’s certified list, which prints Julie Evans, and the council’s own roster carries both spellings against this one seat. Asked for her position on the future of hemp in Texas she answered: "It’s a thriving business, good for consumers, farmers and the citizens of Texas. That’s been proven." Asked for her top three priorities for Texas she answered: "Affordability, healthcare, public schools.
Remove the hemp thc ban. We need to do that asap." Asked why, on prohibition versus regulation, she answered: "Regulations are in place for a reason.
Also, it has been proven to work for the past several years. A ban is ridiculous." On the retail market she answered: "Let’s keep it safe, legal, and regulated.", and on who should be permitted to sell: "Regulated business, medical personnel, over 18, 1-%". She marked "Strongly Support" on the Texas hemp marketplace, on hemp agriculture, and on scientific and evidence-based regulation, and answered "Yes" on freedom of choice in wellness, consumer choice, Texas hemp processing, and on whether she would consider sponsoring or co-sponsoring supporting legislation.