T By: William Barkley and Andy Englund

WB: Okay, so Texas leans right wing. This is known by most people around the world, as George Bush was governor of the state before becoming president, even though his family and him were from Connecticut.

One of the reasons why Texas remains staunchly right wing is the total fiscal irresponsibility of the Texas government in 1836-1845, during the years of the Texas Republic. They printed lots of currency to stabilize the economy. It turned out that printing money out of thin air didn’t help anyone, but instead hyperinflated the currency. Texas had a lot of debts for the war of independence, and needed a way to back up their treasury.

One asset they had was land. Land, land, and more land. The government gave away land to almost anyone willing to settle. To kickstart the new Republic of Texas, the Constitution of 1836 gave 1863.8 hectares to all the heads of families living in Texas on 1836 March 4, and single men aged seventeen years or older received 597.4 hectares. Unfortunately Native Americans and African-Americans were not included. After the 1836 land allotments, the Republic continued to give away land, at smaller portions, to settlers. Lots of people moved into Texas to claim some of these vast open areas. By 2021, 99% of Texas land is still held in private hands. It’s hard to convince people to give up their land for grand infrastructure projects like high speed rail or expansive state parks, because Texas landowners have much more influence than in other places. 

AE: It’s funny you mention George Bush as the one that makes everyone aware that Texas is right wing. The Texan President that preceded him was Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ), best known for signing the Civil Rights Act and creating Medicare and Medicaid. He was a Democrat. George Bush was a Republican. Both parties were considered socially “right wing” for their day. So why did the parties flip? Many argue it’s the Civil Rights Act paired with the Republican “Southern Strategy”.

LBJ had a lot of progressive stances, but so did FDR who was also a Democrat, and the South voted both of them in. LBJ made enemies in the south with the Civil Rights Act, and that’s when the South flipped. I think it’s fair to say that the South has always valued social conservatism over fiscal conservatism, but Texas’s unique history as a sovereign nation may make it more acutely aware of the fiscal pitfalls that come with overspending money you don’t have.

WB: Yeah that’s a good point. The Texas farmers who wrote the Texas constitution after the civil war were distrustful of government. In one forty-five year period from 1820-1865, if you resided in Texas you saw the fall of the Spanish Empire, the rise of the Mexican Republic and fall under dictator Santa Ana. After years of a dictatorship Texas rebelled with other Mexican states like the Yucatán, and formed their own country, the Republic of Texas. The Republic hyperinflated the currency for nine years, and fought unnecessary wars with the Native Americans. Then the US absorbed Texas in the last three days of 1845, kickstarting a three year war against Mexico. Thirteen years after that war ended, the state rebelled and formed part of the Confederate States of America, hyperinflating their currency again, losing excessive amounts of men and capital in the war. You can see why someone living through these events would favor a decentralized government. Today the Texas governor is still one of the weakest governors in the United States, serving as a figurehead, while the real hard political power rests with counties and their local leaders. Texas is more of a collection of strong city states than a centralized bureaucracy. 

AE: And that’s not a bad thing. There’s an old French saying, “The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.” We’ve seen in other governments that a centralized government doesn’t respond well to local problems like how Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said that volunteer firefighters didn’t need compensation after he came back from vacation during the catastrophic wildfires in December of 2019. Another reason Texas refuses to empower a strong centralized government is that power covets more power. Texas has tried multiple times in multiple ways to ensure that power is decentralized, and I think it has turned out well in the long run. Many California businesses are fleeing to Texas due to Texas’s low tax rates, less population dense urban areas, and overall fiscal stability. Texas learned its lesson in the past, and now I would say it’s thriving.

WB: Texas had to learn the hard way. It wasn’t long ago that Texas was a place to avoid for financial reasons after the oil drop in the 1980’s. Entire portions of cities were emptied or slowed down as the Texas economy was much more weighted toward oil and gas than nowadays. Expanding it’s avenues of influence outside pure oil and gas, Texas formed special relationships with foreign countries. One of these efforts helped Texas A&M establish a Qatar campus in 2003. The Qatar Foundation, established by Shiekh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, worked with A&M on this satellite campus. After hurricane Harvey in 2017, Qatar funded $30 million USD of flood prevention and infrastructure improvement in Houston. The Qatari ambassador to the US, H.E. Sheikh Meshal bin Hamad Al Thani, met with Houston Mayor Turner in 2018 underlining the strong relationship Qatar has with Houston, and by extension Texas. Before his tenureship as US ambassador, Al-Thani served as Qatar’s ambassador to the European Union and before then as Qatari liaison to NATO. I’d say Texas has learned to project international soft power, which in turn has cultivated special relationships to help offset catastrophes, both natural and financial. 

AE: That’s a good point. I think another thing that has helped stabilize the Texas economy is diversifying its products. Texas used to be limited to trading commodities, but now it’s developed and attracted a lot of industry that develops goods, which are a lot more stable. Austin produces a lot of tech goods like Dell computers, National Instruments measurement software and hardware, and Samsung products among others. Houston is a major artery in the medical field with a large concentration of world-renowned hospitals. Dallas has Gamestop. While Texas may have been built on land, raised on cattle, and propelled by oil, I think it has hedged its bets on goods that will keep its economy relatively stable through the COVID era. 

I don’t think Texas fared nearly as well during the Great Depression, did it?

WB: Texas got hurt twice in the 1930’s, enduring the Dust Bowl and the Depression, like their neighbors in Oklahoma. My great-grandfather Barkley had to sell eggs door to door in Depression-era Texas. He moved throughout the state where there was work until he settled in the big city of Houston, which had fared a bit better economically. Married men received priority for jobs, so he married his longtime girlfriend, helping with employment. Despite the land giveaways in the 19th century, Texas was rural for most of its history until the invention of AC in the 1950’s. Galveston was one of the richest cities in the country, nicknamed “The Wall Street of the South”, until the destruction of the city from the 1900 hurricane. After the hurricane, all the business and development that Galveston hosted had moved 80 km up north to a city called Houston. Nowadays, Houston is the fourth largest city in the United States. That could have been Galveston. 

AE: It’s crazy to think of the little “what if’s” throughout history. The butterfly effect cuts many ways. Texas could have been French had the Spanish not driven them out early on. It could have stayed a Mexican state had General Houston not decided to attack the Grand Mexican Army at 16:30 during siesta with the sun behind them. We may not have had the iconic line “Houston, we have a problem.” if Lyndon B. Johnson hadn’t been Vice President to influence the 1961 establishment of Mission Control in Houston. Texas has had six different flags fly over its domain in the last 350 years. There’s a lot to unpack.


WB: History is fascinating, and Texas history is great to study since the majority of people arrived within the last 200 years. In fact, this year marks the 200th anniversary of the collapse of the Spanish Empire in Texas. To put that in perspective, Spain ruled Texas for around 300 years, and the US is not quite 250 years old. And so much of the Texas written history happened after the Spanish Empire disintegrated in Texas.

All history helps us better understand how civilization has faced various challenges, and Texas has faced many in the last 200 years. By studying Texas history, we can be calm and collected knowing that our ancestors faced hardships like us and persevered to pass down their experiences. With their histories in mind, we can face our own trials with context and confidence.