WeedVoter

Tom Oxford Libertarian

Attorney General

About this race: Both major-party nominees are sitting state senators who voted on the hemp-THC bills, so this is the rare race where the two records are directly comparable on identical questions. They voted the same way in March and split in August.

Tom OxfordLibertarian

No source of this candidate’s own is on this card. Everything below was published by someone else. So the absence of a cannabis position here is weaker evidence than it looks: it may mean only that this candidate has not published a platform anywhere we have found, or has published one somewhere we are not permitted to read.

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 Tom Oxford, and the limits on it

Nominated at the Libertarian Party of Texas convention in April 2026. He has not held legislative office, so there are no roll calls to search. We have not yet found a dated public statement on cannabis policy.

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

Re-read independently on 2026-09-20: his Libertarian Party national candidate page, his San Antonio Report candidate profile, and the Community Impact question-and-answer with the attorney general candidates. None of these contains the word cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC or CBD.

Their Ballotpedia profile was read in full on 2026-09-20 at ballotpedia.org/Tom_Oxford (26758 characters). It contains no occurrence of cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD, delta-8 or Compassionate Use. When we re-read their Ballotpedia profile on 2026-10-15, it recorded that they had not completed Ballotpedia’s 2026 Candidate Connection survey.

⚠️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.

⚠️Whether this candidate has a campaign site of their own is an open question here, and not a negative answer. This guide has not found one. It no longer claims to have looked in a way that could settle it, because the method this card used to cite was put to a case it was known to have passed and came back just as empty there. So if this candidate publishes a platform of their own, this guide may simply not have reached it, and the absence of a cannabis position below is weaker evidence than it looks.

This card has been corrected. What earlier versions of it said, and what was wrong with them, 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 Tom Oxford

Pages read in full:

  • onyourballot.vote411.org/m/race-detail.do?id=25559865 — sections on the page: Qualifications; Elections; Immigration; Ethics; Litigation — 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.
  • votetheperson.org/candidates/tom-oxford — sections on the page: Candidate; Your match; Record; Sources — the whole of the independent candidate tracker Vote the Person's page for this candidate, read in full by us on 2026-10-06. The page states the office or district we have on file, so the identification is confirmed, and it cites 6 source(s) of its own. Marijuana is one of the issues it tracks by name, and it lists Marijuana among the 41 issues on which it found no public position for this candidate. ⚠️That is a second organisation reporting an empty search, not a statement by the candidate.
  • lp.org/candidate/tom-edward-oxford — sections on the page: a party biography covering his law practice and education, with no issue positions
  • communityimpact.com/central-austin/election/qa-get-to-know-the-candidates-running-for-texas-attorney-general — sections on the page: a candidate questionnaire published 2026-08-31 recording that he did not respond before press time to any of its five questions
  • sanantonioreport.org/profile/tom-oxford-2026-candidate-for-texas-attorney-general — sections on the page: a candidate profile published 2026-07-14 that is biography only
  • web.archive.org/web/20061115id_/http://www.lptexas.org/2006/oxford — sections on the page: his 2006 campaign page, for a different office — Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court. The live address now returns HTTP 404; this is the Internet Archive’s copy, captured 2006-11-15. The page carries no date of its own, so that is a capture date and not a publication date. It is a name, the office, contact details and a line urging a Libertarian vote — there is no issues section and no policy content of any kind, on cannabis or anything else
  • www.texastribune.org/2026/10/05/texas-attorney-general-election-2026-candidates-mayes-middleton-nathan-johnson-tom-oxford — sections on the page: The Texas Tribune's guide to the 2026 attorney general race, published 2026-10-05 and read in full by us on 2026-10-16 (HTTP 200). It names this candidate and gives his background and campaign finances. No cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD, delta-8, cannabinoid, dispensary, decriminalisation, psilocybin or Compassionate Use appears anywhere on the page, for any candidate.
  • theballotbrief.com/candidate/tom-oxford-tx — sections on the page: The Ballot Brief's candidate profile, a guide that says its entries are researched and written with AI, read by us on 2026-10-17 (HTTP 200). It names him as the Libertarian nominee for attorney general and states that no campaign website was found as of September 3, 2026; that is its finding, not ours. None of cannabis, cannabinoid, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD, delta-8, delta-9, Compassionate Use or decriminalisation appears on the page.
  • branch.vote/races/2026-texas-general-election-tx-state-attorney-general-tx-state/candidates/tom-oxford — sections on the page: Branch's candidate page, read by us on 2026-10-17 (HTTP 200). It gives his legal background and, under each of its issue headings, states that as of September 11, 2026 he did not have a website or any information online; that is its finding, not ours. None of cannabis, cannabinoid, marijuana, marihuana, hemp, THC, CBD, delta-8, delta-9, Compassionate Use or decriminalisation appears on the page, in its text or its page source.

See the whole Attorney General 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. Tom Oxford 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 Tom Oxford 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.