Texas House, District 131
Harris County. Neither candidate on this ballot holds Texas legislative office, so neither appears in any 2025 cannabis or hemp roll call. Both were checked against the same sources and neither has a documented act.
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 Scott Whitmarsh, and the limits on it
Checked on 2026-09-18: the member-level rolls of every 2025 cannabis and hemp record vote in the official Texas House and Senate Journals — SB 3 and HB 46 in the regular session, SB 5 in the first called session and SB 6 in the second — including every Yea, Nay, present-not-voting, absent and statement-of-vote list, where this name does not appear because they hold no Texas legislative office; the author, joint-author, coauthor and sponsor tables of every cannabis, hemp, THC and Compassionate Use bill filed in the 87th, 88th and 89th Legislatures and the 2025 called sessions, at the Legislature's own bill-lookup service; and a press sweep including the Spectrum News report on the March 2026 Austin candidate forum on THC policy, which quotes six candidates by name and does not include them.
Also checked, and read in full on 2026-09-18: this candidate's Ballotpedia profile at ballotpedia.org/Scott_Whitmarsh, including any Candidate Connection survey answers published there, which contains no mention of cannabis, marijuana, hemp, THC or CBD.
Their Ballotpedia profile was read in full on 2026-09-20 at ballotpedia.org/Scott_Whitmarsh (15706 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.
Also checked on 2026-10-05: the Texas Hemp Business Council’s published 2026 candidate questionnaire roster at texashempbusinesscouncil.com/wp-json/thbc/v1/candidate-responses and texashempbusinesscouncil.com/candidate-responses. The council is a hemp industry trade association; it put twenty questions about hemp and THC policy to 221 named candidates for the Texas Legislature and statewide office, this candidate among them, and publishes the answers it receives.
On the date checked the council’s own roster recorded this candidate’s status as "awaiting" and carried no answers from them; 30 of the 221 had answered by that date and this candidate was not one of them. The council states that answers are added as they are completed, so this records only what the roster showed on 2026-10-05.
⚠️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 Scott Whitmarsh
Pages read in full:
- www.houstonvotersguide.org/state-representative-rep/Scott-Whitmarsh — sections on the page: Qualifications; the two most pressing issues facing the office, with the candidate's own plans for them — the whole of the two-question set the League of Women Voters of Houston chapter put to this race, read in full by us on 2026-10-06. The page heads itself "State Representative, District 131 - Republican Candidate", so the candidate and the district are both confirmed on it. Neither question asks about cannabis, hemp or drug policy. ⚠️The entry records "No response recieved" [sic] in place of answers, so this records an unanswered questionnaire, not a position. This address no longer works. The page was there when we read it and the guide has since taken it down, and we did not keep a copy — so this is a record of what we read and not something you can check for yourself, which is weaker than every other source cited on this card. We have left the finding here rather than delete it, and left the address so you can see exactly what we are relying on. We checked the address again on 2026-10-17: it still answers HTTP 404.
- votetheperson.org/candidates/scott-whitmarsh — 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 4 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.
- www.ballotready.org/people/scott-whitmarsh — sections on the page: a profile stub carrying no stated positions
- onyourballot.vote411.org/race-detail.do?id=71560805 — sections on the page: Read 2026-10-17, HTTP 200. The League of Women Voters' VOTE411 voter guide page for the November 2026 general election in Texas House District 131. It names this candidate, and unlike the League of Women Voters of Houston page above, whose address no longer works, it is a page a reader can open: that chapter says on the candidate information page of its own guide that the answers it collects are published on Vote411.org as well as in its own guide. This is the League's four-question set for the general election, not the two-question primary set described above. It asks every candidate in the race about their qualifications for the office; access to affordable healthcare, including mental health services, for residents who are uninsured or underserved; state funding for public schools and accountability for taxpayer funds used in voucher or education savings account programs; and the two most pressing issues unique to the district. None of the four questions mentions cannabis, hemp or drug policy. The candidate answered all four questions, and no answer of theirs, nor anything else the page prints for them, 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, drug or drugs. The primary-season page above recorded no response from them; this general-election questionnaire carries their answers.
Could not be read, so nothing is concluded from them:
- www.houstonchronicle.com/projects/2026/houston-texas-primary-voter-guide — returns a client-side loading error rather than the guide
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.
- 2026-09-17 questionnaire — Chose "Support" on maintaining a legal hemp marketplace, which is a position for keeping the products legal. Scored lower than most of this batch because on whether regulation beats prohibition the answer was "Depends on the product" rather than yes, and it would prohibit categories of hemp-derived product outright. The answer also raises how hemp retailers are distributed between neighbourhoods, which is a point about siting rather than legality, counted as +1 at weight 2
Average on the −2 to +2 scale: 1. Full method and the bill table.
-
Questionnaire2026-09-17
Said the hemp industry can be regulated and should be accessible to adults, while excluding some products and raising where hemp shops are concentrated, 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. The council prints this candidate’s name as "Staci Childs Davis". The candidate is identified here by the office, district and party reported to the council, which match a single candidate, and under the spelling on the Secretary of State’s certified list. We have not found any other publication using the longer surname, so we do not print it as a name.
Asked about the future of hemp in Texas, the answer was, in full: "I believe that the hemp industry can be regulated and should be accessible to adults and people who are going through severe illness. I think naturally grown and produced hemp-derived products should be sold through licensed retailers, excluding artificial products and products that are known to cause extreme impairment. However, I do believe that there is an overabundance of hemp stores in black and brown neighborhoods, and they should be distributed more evenly throughout Texas."
Asked who should be permitted to sell THC, to whom and with what safeguards: "Licensed THC distributors should be able to sell verified, vetted hemp-derived products from licensed retailers. The appropriate age should be adults who are legally allowed to drink and smoke cigarettes. However, artificial and certified dangerous hemp-derived products that are known to cause impairment should be prohibited." On the questionnaire’s fixed-choice questions: on maintaining a legal, regulated hemp marketplace, "Support"; on whether regulation is preferable to prohibition where a product can be made and sold safely, "Depends on the product"; on retail regulation, "Reasonable statewide licensing/registration".
The date is the date the council recorded the submission, in Central time.
texashempbusinesscouncil.com, texashempbusinesscouncil.com, texashempbusinesscouncil.com, texashempbusinesscouncil.com
All 2 candidates on this ballot are listed.