WeedVoter

Steven Shook Democrat

US House, District 26

About this race: A US House seat on the 120th Congress map, covering all of Cooke County, most of Denton County and most of Wise County. The records on the race page are votes and cosponsorships in Congress, listed in date order, each with its own source.

Whose record this page shows. The paragraph above is about the race, not about this candidate in particular. Everything after this line on this page is Steven Shook’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 Steven Shook, 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 US House, District 26 race page.

Which map this is. This seat is drawn on the 120th Congress map, the one on the 3 November ballot. Measured by area — not by population — 94% of it was inside district 26 on the 119th Congress map, which stands until the end of 2026; the rest came from district 13 (5.9%). So where a candidate below is badged as holding seat 26 today, that badge means the seat number on this ballot — not all of the ground the seat now covers. Your own district may have changed number without your address changing. Check your own address in the district finder.

Steven ShookDemocrat

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 Steven Shook, and the limits on it

Checked on 2026-09-18: their campaign site, their Ballotpedia entry and a long-form interview. The Dallas morning news 2026 questionnaire was not retrievable: the page shell loads but the answers are rendered in the browser, so we have not read it and are not claiming it is silent.

Also checked: the Spectrum News report of 2026-03-03 on Texas candidates and THC policy, the only outlet that put the question directly to 2026 congressional candidates, which does not quote them; and NORML’s Texas guide, which covers sitting members of Congress only. We also checked the full membership roll of the 89th Texas Legislature: this candidate is not a member, so there is no state roll call to attribute.

Also checked, and read in full on 2026-09-18: this candidate's Ballotpedia profile at ballotpedia.org/Steven_Shook, including any Candidate Connection survey answers published there, which contains no mention of cannabis, marijuana, hemp, THC or CBD.

The candidate's own campaign site was read on 2026-09-20 at shookforcongress2026.com — found by search and confirmed to name this candidate before it was attributed to them. 2 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.

Their Ballotpedia profile was read in full on 2026-09-20 at ballotpedia.org/Steven_Shook (20023 characters). It contains no occurrence of cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD, delta-8 or Compassionate Use. They completed a Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey — free-text answers they wrote themselves — and it raises no cannabis subject.

The site's own sitemap was read on 2026-09-21, which reaches pages nothing links to. Their campaign site publishes a sitemap listing 8 page(s), of which 7 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.

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 Steven Shook

Pages read in full:

  • onyourballot.vote411.org/m/race-detail.do?id=25712136 — sections on the page: Qualifications; Balance of Power; Immigration; Economy; Energy; Healthcare — 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. The candidate answered, in free text of their own, and no answer of theirs 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, HB 1325 or HB 46.
  • shookforcongress2026.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. Read 2026-10-17 in a fresh crawl starting from the homepage: 6 pages read at HTTP 200 (the homepage, the site’s sitemaps, every page it links to one level down, and the pages under its issues and news sections). No cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD, delta-8, cannabinoid, rescheduling, Schedule iii, safer Banking or decriminalisation term on a word boundary in the text or the raw page source of any page read. The same crawler, run the same day from each homepage, found the published cannabis planks on three campaign sites used as controls.
  • communityimpact.com/frisco/election/q-a-meet-the-candidates-running-for-u-s-house-district-26 — sections on the page: Community Impact's candidate Q&A for this November race, published 2026-09-15, read in full by us on 2026-10-17 (HTTP 200). The paper asked each candidate why they are running, what the biggest challenges facing the district are, how they plan to address them and what their top priorities would be; none of those questions asks about cannabis. The candidate answered, in free text of their own, and no answer printed under their name contains, on a word boundary, cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD, delta-8, cannabinoid, dispensary or Compassionate Use.
  • www.crosstimbersgazette.com/2026/10/01/meet-the-candidates-u-s-house-district-26-3 — sections on the page: The Cross Timbers Gazette's "Meet the Candidates: U.S. House District 26", published 2026-10-01, 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 contains, on a word boundary, none of cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD, delta-8, cannabinoid, dispensary or Compassionate Use.

See the whole US House, District 26 race, including every opponent →

Who is paying for this campaign

Campaign finance — Federal Election Commission

Commission candidate H6TX26144, filed as “SHOOK, STEVEN JAMES”, principal committee C00918573 (SHOOK FOR CONGRESS). fec.gov

Everything below covers the reporting period that ended 2026-06-30, as filed with the Commission. These figures lag the filing deadlines: money raised after that date does not appear until the next report is due, so a recent contribution is not missing, it is not yet reportable.

What we could and could not put a label on

Fraction classified: 0%. We examined $9,751 — the 5 largest employer groupings ($9,751) and 0 committee contributions ($0) the Commission shows for this committee — and matched $0 of it to one of our own patterns. $9,751 is listed above as unclassified.

What that figure is not. $9,751 is what we examined, not everything this campaign raised: the Commission returns the largest employer groupings rather than every contribution, and contributions too small to be itemised carry no employer at all. Read the classified fraction as a share of what we looked at.

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 Steven Shook 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.