How this guide was made

Research and writing by publisher Omar Afra.

Some days of the week I’m a better Muslim than others. I’m not a scholar, a theologian, or anyone’s model of perfect observance. I’m a Texas Muslim, and like every other Muslim I know, my faith sits inside a life that is complicated, specific and entirely my own.

That matters here because Muslims are not a voting bloc with one brain. We are not a monolith. We come from countless ethnicities, countries, neighborhoods, classes and political traditions. We disagree about candidates, taxes, schools, policing, foreign policy, abortion, guns, the role of government and probably what belongs on a plate of biryani. We see the world differently because, like every other group of Texans, we are different people.

What binds this community together is faith, family, a shared civic life and, increasingly, the experience of being told that our belonging is somehow conditional. In Texas today, Muslims are routinely discussed as though we are foreign to the place we live, work, raise children, build businesses, pay taxes and bury our parents. That dog don’t hunt. We are as Texan as the next dude and as American as anyone else. Nobody gets to ration either identity out to us.

There are also questions that deserve particular scrutiny from a Muslim civic publication: civil liberties, religious freedom, the treatment of Muslim institutions and communities, the use of public power against minorities, the war in Gaza and the use of American money and political influence in foreign policy. Families matter enormously to this community too—as they do across Texas—and so do schools, health care, household costs, public safety and the basic ability to build a decent life. None of those concerns dictates a single political conclusion. They are subjects worth examining carefully.

That is what this guide is for. It is not here to manufacture a Muslim vote or tell anyone which box to check. It is here to give an underserved community better tools: the candidates’ actual words, their records, their money, their actions, their engagement with Muslim Texans, and a clear explanation of what the office they want can actually do.

We can disagree with one another and still insist on being taken seriously. We can bring different worldviews into the voting booth and still arrive there with the same confidence that this state belongs to us too.

So consider this guide an invitation to do exactly that: read, argue, investigate, make up your own mind—and then flex a little Texanness at the ballot box.

Hell or high water.

Omar Afra is not an Islamic scholar, theologian, lawyer, election official, or campaign-finance professional. This guide is journalism and public-record research, not religious, legal, or voting advice.

The candidate list follows the Texas Secretary of State's 2026 General Election statewide sample ballot.

What counts as evidence

Every finding carries a date, the kind of record (a vote, statement, official action, filing, court opinion or event), a link to the source and the date we last reviewed it. Sources are labelled Primary (the official record itself), Reported (independent journalism) or Candidate-stated (the campaign's own words). “No public info found” does not prove something never happened. It means we found no verifiable public record in the sources reviewed through September 24, 2026. The opened “How we checked” note identifies the scope and any named access limitation.

Political money

Direct PAC contributions, independent spending for or against a candidate, and individual donations are shown separately, each with its cycle, date range and filing. Direct AIPAC PAC contributions, other identified pro-Israel PAC contributions, independent spending for and against a candidate, major individual-donor context and candidate financial actions remain distinct classes. A red preview strip appears only for a sourced qualifying PAC or independent-spending amount of at least $1,000. Smaller exact amounts remain in the ledger, and individual donors never trigger the PAC strip.

Israel and Palestine are policy questions, not religious labels

This guide treats Israel and Palestine as foreign-policy, campaign-finance and public-spending issues—not as a Jewish-versus-Muslim religious issue. We do not infer a donor's or candidate's position on Israel from religion, ethnicity, surname or Jewish identity. Pro-Israel PACs and donor networks are included only when their political activity concerning U.S.-Israel policy is documented.

The guide examines whether organized spending focused on U.S.-Israel policy can shift attention, campaign resources or political incentives toward a foreign-policy issue rather than Texas-specific priorities. Federal election law prohibits foreign nationals from making or directing election contributions or expenditures. AIPAC PAC and other U.S.-registered committees are therefore treated here as domestic political committees, not as foreign campaign funding. Source: Federal Election Commission foreign-national rules.

Federal aid and public money

U.S. aid to Israel is federal spending authorized by Congress, not a special Texas state tax. Under the current U.S.-Israel memorandum of understanding, the baseline for fiscal years 2019 through 2028 is $3.8 billion annually—$3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing and $500 million for missile defense—subject to congressional appropriation and excluding supplemental appropriations. Source: Congressional Research Service. Texans, like other U.S. taxpayers, contribute to the federal revenue that funds U.S. foreign assistance; this guide therefore treats votes and political spending tied to Israel policy as relevant to public-money priorities. It does not calculate a Texas-specific share.

Gaza, accountability and attribution

Publisher Omar Afra considers candidate support for U.S. policies materially enabling mass civilian harm in Gaza to be a central subject of this guide because U.S. military support and Israel-policy campaign money are matters of foreign policy and public spending. Amnesty International and the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry have each concluded that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza. That conclusion is attributed to those organizations. The publisher's emphasis is an editorial perspective, not a voting instruction or a decision made for readers.

The methodology also recognizes that Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups committed grave crimes during the October 7 attacks and against hostages. Source: UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry. Accountability for those crimes is distinct from the separate assessment of Israel's conduct in Gaza.

Why issues change by office

A railroad commissioner has no say over foreign aid; a U.S. senator does. So each office gets the categories that match its legal authority, in that order. You can move your own priorities to the top of any candidate page; that changes the order only. Foreign-policy records receive greater emphasis for U.S. Senate, whose members vote on aid, arms and treaties, than for state offices that do not control federal foreign policy.

Your picks are private

Picks are stored only in your browser's local storage. They are not sent to Texas Muslim or anyone else.

Corrections and updates

Campaigns, organizations and readers may contact Texas Muslim with a filing, statement, event record or other documentation that supports a correction or update. We review the underlying record before changing a candidate page.

Research and writing by publisher Omar Afra.

Omar Afra is not an Islamic scholar, theologian, lawyer, election official, or campaign-finance professional. This guide is journalism and public-record research, not religious, legal, or voting advice.

Back to the guide