In the wake of Tuesday’s debate, the particulars of how our candidates’ political stances will affect each state is more important than ever. Yet for Texas, a few issues seem to stick out. Here is a quick glimpse into each candidate’s policies, and how they specifically impact the Lone Star State.
Immigration
Harris: Harris has mostly remained ambiguous on her immigration stance but has recently moved further right than in the past. While still opposed to mass deportations and family separation, she has promoted the enforcement of immigration laws and proposed making asylum more difficult for immigrant populations. She has also recently backed a bill that would have made it harder to enter the country and be approved for citizenship, while also increasing presidential power to keep migrants away. Harris has also called for “consequences” to those who cross unlawfully but remains unclear as to what those consequences may be.
Harris’ policies seem to focus on specifically stopping illegal immigration. Yet it is important to note however that her changing stance and leniency has caused many critics fear that her ideas fall short of solving the issue.
Trump: Most of Trump’s campaign base runs off this single issue, and the policies he proposes would have widespread effects on the lives of both documented and undocumented Texans. He has taken an incredibly tough stance on immigration, proposing sweeping reforms with wide-reaching impacts. On the trail, he has promised to finish the border wall he began in 2016 and aims to create a mass deportation initiative, with his running mate JD Vance saying, “Let’s start with one million people… and then we can go from there.” In addition to mass deportation, Trump seeks to end the catch-and-release initiative, restore Remain in Mexico and deputize the National Guard to restrict immigration at the border. He has also wanted to end a policy that allows the children of undocumented residents to be eligible for citizenship.
While the effects of these measures would most likely be seen in the deportation of undocumented residents here in Texas, there are also concerns about the economic viability of Trump’s reforms. The Austin-American Statesman’s editorial board has such concerns, arguing that the “mass removal of workers would devastate Texas businesses.” The editorial board went on to cite several studies claiming an economic benefit of undocumented immigration and contended that undocumented immigrants are vital to the Texas economy. There is little doubt Trump’s policies would at the very least restrict border flow, but these concerns call into question the viability of his promises on border reforms.
Abortion
Harris: As a longtime champion of female reproductive rights, Harris’ stance comes at no surprise. On the trail, Harris has made numerous promises to sign any law that would “restore reproductive freedom,” and has notably vowed to “never allow a national abortion ban to become law.” During her first presidential debate, the vice president proudly noted that she wants to “reinstate the protection of Roe,” which would mean outlawing bans on abortions before fetal viability. If such a measure were to take place, it would overrule state law and force Texas to legalize abortion access once again.
Trump:Trump’s stance has changed over the past several years, but it seems that he has finally settled his policy on the abortion issue. In his debate with President Biden, he stated that he champions states rights and ultimately would not support a federal ban. Further, he claimed he is a proponent for certain exceptions, notably for cases of rape, incest and occasions where the life of the woman is at risk. Despite this, he still largely opposes taxpayer funding for abortions.
As it stands, it is unlikely that abortion will become legalized again in Texas. Trump’s policy on abortion focuses on keeping the issue at the state level, and as the Texas Supreme Court rejected several challenges to current abortion laws in May of this year, it is improbable much will change.
Economy
Harris: Harris’ policy seems to be aimed toward “strengthening the middle class.” To achieve this goal, she has promised to create mortgage assistance programs for first-time homebuyers and ban price gouging at grocery stores. As the inflation issue has plagued her campaign trail, she has been vocal about her goal to “take on the high costs that matter… like the cost of food.” To address rising energy costs, she has stated that her “position is that we have got to invest in diverse sources of energy,” despite her previous support on banning fracking and limiting oil production.
Harris’ policies if enacted will have obvious positive effects on the economy, but for Texas in particular, her past environmental stances may be something to consider. One of Texas’s biggest industries is the oil and natural gas market, and Harris’ support of lawsuits against these may have negative effects on the Texas economy as a whole. Yet this may be offset by her stance on food prices, which has been a major issue for Texans, specifically in the Houston area.
Trump: Maintaining a consistent polling advantage in this arena, Trump has focused his economic policy on his quest to “end inflation and make America affordable again.” He plans to do this by expanding tax cuts for most Americans, launching a housing initiative on federal land, imposing new tariffs and repealing many Biden-era clean energy initiatives which he perceives as a threat to the auto industry. In addition, Trump also wants to increase domestic energy production, specifically in oil and natural gas, which he believes will decrease costs. Finally, Trump claims he can decrease the rising housing costs through immigration reforms.
Any economic policy will have a major effect on Texas, but Trump’s plans regarding oil and natural gas are the most relevant to the Lone Star State. As Texas is the largest producer of oil in the United States, Trump’s stances on fracking and big oil have the potential to boost the Texas economy and keep Texas at the forefront of energy production. This being said, certain experts warn that he may be overzealous in his rhetoric and that the sentiment in his oft-used phrase “Drill, baby, drill,” may not be what is needed.
