Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick was clear from the start.
Weeks before this year’s legislative session began, and before he announced any other priorities, the Republican Senate leader said he wanted lawmakers to ban, at any cost, products that contain the psychoactive compound in weed. His target was the multibillion-dollar hemp industry that had sprouted up thanks to a loophole in a 2019 state law that legalized products providing a similar high to marijuana.
Patrick justified his conviction by contending that retailers had abused that loophole to sell products with dangerous amounts of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC. He accused the retailers of preying on the state’s young people with shops posted near schools and marketing aimed at children.
“I couldn’t, in good conscience, leave here knowing if we don’t do something about it in the next two years — how many kids get sick?” Patrick said in March, talking about his willingness to force a special legislative session by blocking must-pass legislation from making it through the Texas Senate.
And ultimately, Patrick got his way — and an explosion of backlash.
As pressure mounts on the governor to veto a THC ban sent to his desk, Patrick finds himself in the unfamiliar position of taking flak from conservative activists and media personalities outside the Capitol, many of whom typically march in political lockstep with a man who has long been a darling of the right and done more than perhaps any other elected official to drive Texas rightward.
After spearheading the THC ban, Patrick has been accused by some on the right of creating a nanny state and giving Mexican drug cartels a business opportunity to fill demand in the black market. He has been labeled a booze lobby shill for beer distributors who stand to benefit. A hardline conservative state lawmaker who voted against the ban said it contradicted “the Texas mantra of being pro-business, pro-farmer and pro-veteran.”
[…]
Some opponents of the total ban have vowed retribution against Patrick, who is running for reelection in 2026 armed with an endorsement from President Donald Trump and more than $33 million in his campaign coffers. Those factors — and Patrick’s long history of promoting policies that most primary voters see as higher priorities than preserving THC access — mean it is unlikely the blowback will cost Patrick much, according to political observers.
“It’s hard to imagine given Patrick’s position and where he is now that somehow this is going to be in and of itself the source of some fundamental political threat,” said Jim Henson, director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin. “Honestly I think we’re not used to seeing Dan Patrick criticized very much from within his own party and so it’s really sticking out, and that’s fair.”
I do not for a minute think this will have anything more than a marginal effect on the 2026 Republican primary, where I expect Patrick to draw the usual no-name challengers. He may lose some protest votes, but likely not enough for anyone to raise an eyebrow. But I am of course hoping this spills over into the general election, where plenty of nominal Republicans who aren’t regular primary voters are. I hope very much that they are mad enough about this to take it out on him next November, and I have expressed that sentiment many times. I hope Vikki Goodwin makes this a part of her campaign. It may well not be enough, but it’s a good opening and seems to have legs from a news perspective. No reason not to press forward with it.