Texas isn’t just a place I happen to call home, it’s a identity I actively embrace. That sentiment, once playfully captured in a popular 1997 tune, now carries a deeper weight for me, especially as the Republican Party of Texas shapes its vision for the nation’s future. Had my roots in the Lone Star State tied me directly to the party’s 2026 platform, I might well retreat to the cool depths of San Antonio’s Natural Bridge Caverns, or even seek evaluation at Western State Psychiatric Hospital.
What’s drawing attention now isn’t the Alamo, but the bold, sometimes startling, policy agenda being advanced under the banner of Christian nationalism, MAGA principles, and a renewed emphasis on Trump-era ideals. This framework outlines not just governance tweaks but a full-scale reimagining of American civic life.
The party’s official 2026 platform and resolutions spell out a sweeping agenda. Texas asserts its right to secede from the Union. Social Security would shift to a fully privatized model, while the 16th Amendment, enabling the federal income tax, faces repeal. The Federal Reserve, long seen as an independent central banking force, is targeted for dismantling. So too is the Environmental Protection Agency and the legal foundations of the Endangered Species Act.
Labor regulations are also in the crosshairs: minimum wage standards and prevailing wage rules would be eliminated, along with requirements for employers to offer paid sick or family leave. The 17th Amendment, which introduced direct election of U.S. senators, is proposed for repeal, returning selection power to state legislatures.
A series of other federal agencies and programs also face restructuring or dissolution. The Department of Education is slated for elimination, along with all major federal welfare initiatives. The Affordable Care Act would be repealed outright. The military’s geographic footprint may shift too, with plans to honor Southern figures and reverse recent base-name changes.
Public lands, currently held in trust by Washington, would be transferred to state control, save those explicitly authorized under the Constitution, such as military installations and federal offices. The United States would also withdraw from the United Nations and remove its physical presence from American soil.
More specific proposals underscore the party’s ideological leanings. Environmental policies must not hinder business activity or private property rights, and high-speed rail projects, often backed by public funds, would lose federal support. Gun rights expand further, with constitutional carry taking center stage and authorization for armor-piercing rounds and chemical dispersal tools.
Citizenship itself may undergo a constitutional rewrite: the 14th Amendment could be amended to limit birthright citizenship to those with at least one citizen parent. Abortion access would be curtailed through legislative action, while a range of taxes, including estate, payroll, capital gains, and gift levies, would be eliminated.
Education also figures prominently in the vision. Sex education in public schools, across all grade levels, would be banned, alongside instruction on sexual health, identity, or choice. In its place, the curriculum would emphasize biblical principles, servant leadership, and models of self-governance rooted in Christian values.
A newly released political manifesto outlines a series of legislative and constitutional proposals for the state of Texas, advocating for a return to what its authors describe as traditional Judeo-Christian values and limited government intervention. The document calls for the establishment of chaplains in public schools to provide guidance based on biblical principles and demands an amendment to the state constitution guaranteeing the inalienable right to refuse medical treatments, including vaccinations.
Educational reforms proposed in the text include a statewide ban on all psychological and mental health inquiries, surveys, and instructional activities within public schools. Additionally, the plan seeks to prohibit the fluoridation of community water supplies and repeal existing hate crime statutes.
The manifesto takes a firm stance against same-sex marriage and proposes strict restrictions on property ownership. It suggests that the sale of real estate interests within Texas be limited to American citizens or U.S.-owned corporations. Land currently held by foreign individuals or entities with foreign ties would be required to be sold and vacated immediately.
Regarding public safety and commerce, the authors advocate for the elimination of gun-free zones and the imposition of a 100% surcharge on remittances sent by undocumented immigrants to recipients abroad. Elected officials would be required to fully cooperate with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The document lists numerous federal departments and agencies for defunding or abolition, including the Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives bureau, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Commerce, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Department of Education, the Department of the Interior (specifically the Bureau of Land Management), the Department of Energy, the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Department of Labor, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Labor Relations Board, the Transportation Security Administration, the Internal Revenue Service, and the United States Agency for International Development.
Further proposals encourage the government to divest from businesses deemed suitable for private sector management. On foreign policy, the text opposes offensive military action or war involvement unless declared by the U.S. Congress.
The author of the commentary accompanying these points, a local columnist, noted that the only significant merit of the document is its insistence that only Congress can declare war. This provision, the author argued, makes a competing Republican leadership mandate appear more reasonable by comparison. The author suggested that these proposals reflect a desire to revert to an era reminiscent of pre-war Europe and urged voters to consider the manifesto when casting ballots in upcoming elections, recommending a vote for Democratic candidates across the board. The piece concluded with a tribute to Ukraine and provided the author’s contact email for correspondence.