Stacey Swann

If elected to the Texas House, I would focus my energy on amending current Texas law so women who are miscarrying do not have to be on the verge of death in order to receive necessary medical treatment. Abortions should also be allowed so women are not forced to carry nonviable pregnancies to term and in cases of rape and incest. However, my own person belief is that Texas women should still retain the reproductive freedom guaranteed by Roe v Wade.

Disagree

Mifepristone and misoprostol are extremely safe drugs, safer even than penicillin and Tylenol. Virtual consultations are just as effective for patients as in-person consultations. Requiring significant reporting invades patient privacy and can be used as a scare tactic against women. The government does not belong inside doctor offices.

Disagree

Abortion only accounts for 3% of Planned Parenthood's services. It provides vital healthcare for women far beyond abortion care like cancer screening, STD testing, and birth control. Those aspects of their care should be eligible for the same grants and funding as other non-profit health clinics.

Neutral

Euthanasia is a complex topic, and the laws around it vary widely. My support of a law on this topic would be tied to its specific parameters.

Strongly Agree

Texas's minimum wage has not increased since 2009, and we all know that inflation has significantly driven up the cost of living. The minimum wage here should be raised but not by so much it causes small businesses to close.

Choose not to answer

In order to give a yes or no answer, I would need the specifics around the investment. Recently, valid concerns about usefulness and practicality of ESGs have been growning.

It seems unconstitutional, in all circumstances I can think of, for a government to step in and permanently close a church. If church leaders or members are violating specific state or federal laws, they should be arrested and tried. Parishioners who have been harmed can file civil lawsuits or press criminal charges.

Neutral

This question is too broad for a simple yes or no answer. The answer depends on the type of service the business or person is providing and their reasons for refusal. Certain refusals have been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, and those laws should be respected.

My views align most closely with B. People should always have the option of private healthcare options. However, Medicaid and Medicare are essential programs that repeatedly save the lives of the elderly and children. In addition, the Affordable Care Act has been essential in my ability to pursue my freelance career goals and still secure quality health insurance.

For a variety of reasons, I don't think COVID vaccines should be mandatory. However, without most children getting measles vaccines, we would have unacceptable levels of child mortality. There must be a balance between freedoms and public safety.

Strongly Agree

The US has a longstanding friendship with Israel that is important to both the cultural ties between the two and for foreign policy reasons. However, our funding of their military and sale of arms must be balanced with American interests.

Agree

Our border security should embrace advances in technology and do more to stop drug smuggling and cartel activities. We should stop wasting money on efforts that are ineffective.

Strongly Disagree

Texas parents already have the freedom to choose their child's school; it is fiscally irresponsible to demand the government funds it, too. Rural communities, most of which have no private schools, would be devastated by vast quantities of their tax dollars going into the bank accounts of those already wealthy enough to send their children to private schools. Our property taxes would rise while our schools decline. Piles of public money with no accountability? I say no!

Choose not to answer

This question is too biased to answer seriously. Our public school teachers and librarians are valuable community members. They are not groomers, and the disrespect embedded in that phrasing is shameful. The propaganda claiming parents and doctors are encouraging genital surgery on minors has no basis in fact. This is a manufactured issue driven by groups seeking to undermine public education for their own agendas.

Agree

Choose not to answer

This question is too broad to give a yes or no answer to. Gender affirming treatments are sometimes part of mental health care, and some mental health care can be indirectly be tied to taxpayer funds.

Strongly Disagree

Marriage is also a civil contract that interacts in many ways with our laws and legal system. It must have a legal definition beyond the religious one. Churches can make their own rules around the services they specifically perform. The government isn't trying to alter that definition.

I believe all people are worth of dignity and respect and that far more unites us than divides us.

Neutral

I agree with current Texas law that allows voters to fill out a Reasonable Impediment Declaration and provide additional alternative ID forms.

Neutral

I agree with the philosophy behind the NPVIC; however, I do not currently know enough about the legal objections to the compact to know if it is Constitutional.

I'm not sure how to interpret this extremely broad question.

Choose not to answer

CRT is a graduate-level academic theory, and is thus so complex that I don't know enough about to say which aspects I do or don't agree with. Your question feels fundamentally flawed to me. Do I think laws around housing in the past were influenced by racism and impacted the economies of black communities? This is the historical fact of redlining and isn't really debatable. Do I think all US institutions are fundamentally racist? Of course not.

Choose not to answer

Do you think private entities like women's college sororities, nonprofit women's shelters, and privately owned businesses shouldn't be able to make their own decisions around membership and services? Why does the government need to be inserting itself into these situations? This sounds eerily like the type of government overreach in Project 2025.

Climate change is real and requires urgent policy action. We see this in Texas with our increasingly volatile weather including droughts, floods, and temperature extremes. That action must be feasible, though, and not overly destructive to a functioning economy. However, doing nothing about protecting our drinking water supplies or improving our electrical grid would also be highly destructive to our economy.

Texas is a vast state with extremely variable weather. We cannot focus on one energy source to meet the needs of our population with that kind of environmental diversity. We must embrace all the forms of energy at our disposal.

No

No

I agree with the Preamble to the Constitution: "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity"

Moderate

Disagree

Again, this question is too broad. I do not believe in defunding police departments and moving that money to community programs. However, there are some areas where the police would welcome the shifting of responsibilities over to community programs. Modern police departments are often expected to solve every single community problem which is too big of a mandate for any single group.

I am a gun owner, and I believe in the 2nd Amendment. However, we have a gun violence epidemic in our country and too often the victims are children. We need common sense gun reform which balances 2nd Amendment freedoms with public safety.

Choose not to answer

Our real goal should be creating a world where teachers do not have to carry firearms in elementary schools to stave off mass murder. The dozens and dozens of guns on the dozens and dozens of officers that responded to the Uvalde shooting didn't keep those children, or their teachers, safe. A good guy with a gun is no match for an assault weapon; we have seen this time and time again.