WeedVoter

Pat Dixon Libertarian

Governor

About this race: The incumbent vetoed a total THC ban that his own party's legislature passed, then called a session to restrict the same products another way. His main opponent voted against that ban and coauthored a decriminalisation bill. Both records are below.

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 Pat Dixon’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 Governor race page.

Pat DixonLibertarian
100/100 support for legal access — top band, 67 to 100 thin — one or two records produced this number · 2 of 3 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.

  • 2026-09-29 questionnaire — Answered in his own words that adult-use cannabis should be legal in Texas, that restrictions on adults making their own decisions should be eliminated, and that all cannabis convictions should be automatically expunged, counted as +2 at weight 2
  • 2026-08-19 statement — Policy statement opposing the attempt to outlaw the hemp business and arguing adults should be free to make their own choices, counted as +2 at weight 2

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

  • Said2026-08-19

    Published a policy statement headed "The War on Hemp", carrying the site's own publication date of August 19, 2026. It states "In Texas we have a war on hemp." and "Dan Patrick tried to outlaw the hemp business in the recent legislative session.", says of Senate Bill 3 that it would have effectively eliminated the existing Texas market for intoxicating hemp-derived THC products, applauds the veto of that bill, and adds: "But I believe Texas should go further: adults should be free to make their own choices, provided they don't harm others."

    It also describes the 2026-07-31 Department of State Health Services reclassification of delta-8 and argues that "A free market requires predictable rules, respect for property rights, and the freedom to succeed or fail without government picking the winners."

    patdixon.org

  • Questionnaire2026-08-28

    Submitted the Marijuana Policy Project and Texas Cannabis Policy Center 2026 candidate survey and published the submission receipt on his campaign site, the receipt dated August 28, 2026. The survey asked about expanding medical cannabis to flower, reducing penalties for possession of THC hemp products to a civil fine of up to $100, whether cannabis and THC products should be legal to possess for adults 21 and older, and whether a legal regulated adult-use market should be created.

    His written comment on each of the four questions is "I am a Libertarian".

    ⚠️One limit on this entry: the receipt renders its selected Yes/No buttons as vector graphics rather than text, so which box he ticked on each question cannot be read from the document. Only his written comments are quoted here, and no position is inferred from the unreadable selections.

    WeedVoter’s note — shown here, but deliberately left out of the score: The submission receipt records that he answered the survey, but its Yes and No selections cannot be read from the document, so no direction can be taken from it.

    patdixon.org, patdixon.org

  • Questionnaire2026-09-29

    Published his answers to the Texas Cannabis Policy Questionnaire on his own campaign site, the post carrying the site's own publication date of September 29, 2026 and naming TexasCannabis.org as the questioner. Asked "What is your position on legalizing adult-use, or recreational, cannabis in Texas?" he answered: "It should be legal. End the war on drugs." On the medical programme he wrote: "The current status seems burdensome and complicated.", and drew an analogy to the ending of alcohol prohibition On patient registration he wrote: "Yes, I support elimination of restrictions for adults to make their own decisions, just as they do for alcohol."

    On past convictions he wrote: "All convictions for cannabis crimes should be automatically expunged." On public safety he wrote: "Impaired driving should be illegal and well enforced as it is for alcohol, which is also a drug."

    ⚠️This is a self-published copy of his own answers on his own site; the questioning organisation's published version of the responses was not located.

    patdixon.org

See the whole Governor race, including every opponent →

Who is paying for this campaign

Campaign finance — Texas Ethics Commission

We could not match a Commission filer number to this name. The Commission’s list of candidates who have appointed a campaign treasurer carried no single row matching both the surname and the given name on the ballot for this seat, so none was guessed at. Pat Dixon may have filed under a different form of their name.

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.

Search campaign filings at the Texas Ethics Commission (ethics.state.tx.us) → — choose Transaction Type “Contributions” and search by name.

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 Pat Dixon 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.