Donald Trump has been elected as the 47th President of the United States after overperforming expectations in many swing states during Tuesday night’s election.
Obviously, Texas was not considered a swing state in this election, and Trump’s victory in the state was concluded fairly swiftly.
Recommended Videos
SEE ALSO: How Donald Trump won Texas, outperformed 2024 election projections
With a majority of Texans in support of another Trump administration, it’s worth asking what the next four years will actually look like now that the election is in the rearview mirror.
KPRC 2′s Michael Horton sat down with Mark Jones, a political science professor at Rice University, to get into what the president-elect’s next administration could look like for Texans.
Michael Horton: In what ways do you see this election result impacting Texans the most?
Mark Jones: I mean, the difference between Donald Trump in the White House and Kamala Harris in the White House is pretty dramatic in terms of policy—both domestic policy and foreign policy, but also, in terms of their very different styles.
I think from a policy effect, it’s very consequential for Texas voters, and you’re going to see far more conservative policies either being maintained or promoted, rather than the much more progressive policy that we would’ve seen from Harris, ranging from issues like government spending and student debt forgiveness, to restrictions on oil and natural gas.
There are a whole host of things where, you know, from a policy perspective, a Harris government would have promoted far more progressive policies in terms of social issues as well as economic issues, whereas the Trump administration’s going to be more likely to have conservative policies related to social issues and economic issues.
So, the Department of Education and Department of Justice under a Harris administration would be heavily involved in promoting transgender rights, for instance, as well as diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives more broadly. In a Trump administration, the Department of Education and the attorney general are going to be more likely to be pushing back against state efforts to promote DEI as well as transgender rights.
Michael Horton: With the wins in the senate leaning towards the right last night, do you think that that is going to make this presidency different than his first term?
Mark Jones: Much depends on, you know, how Republicans approach the filibuster. It’s ironic, because, as recently as a few days ago, Democrats were making the case that if Kamala Harris won and they took control of the Senate, one of the first things they would have looked into is abolishing the filibuster. But now, I think you’re going to have second thoughts among Democrats.
I think there are still a sufficient number of Republicans who see the value of having the filibuster and protecting it in terms of placing limits on the executive branch, that they’re unlikely to get rid of it. But that doesn’t mean that at the margins, they may find new creative ways to water it down slightly, which is a trend that Chuck Schumer started some time ago when he was senate majority leader.
One final thing, if we look back at the first Trump administration, if you had to point to a single thing that Trump did that was consequential for public policy was to appoint three conservative justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. And not just three conservative justices, but three relatively young conservative justices. Between Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh, they’ve had a powerful impact.
It’s quite likely that Trump will have the opportunity to appoint one to two more justices over the course of the next four years. You know, there will be an incentive for some of the older conservative justices to perhaps retire while Trump still has a majority in the Senate, so that Republicans can be assured of locking in and one or more conservative justices, but instead of them being in their 70s, they would be in their 40s and 50s.
Michael Horton: Have you heard anything about Texas politicians possibly running for administrative roles in Trump’s office? I know I’ve seen Dan Patrick’s name thrown around, along with Ken Paxton.
Mark Jones: Clearly, Ken Paxton, Dan Patrick, Greg Abbott are high-profile and very influential Texas politicians. I’m skeptical that they would actually prefer a cabinet appointment to their current position. You know, especially for Abbott or Patrick, I mean, Abbott is the most powerful Republican governor in the country, and Lieutenant Governor Patrick, between his own presence and his control of the Texas Senate, has tremendous influence over politics and policy here.
I think the only way that you would see them, you know, someone like Dan Patrick or Greg Abbott take up posts in the White House is if they have already decided that they would not be seeking reelection in 2026, and that this would be sort of in some way a swan song for their political career. As for Paxton, his name will be mentioned, but I suspect that if it reached a level of serious consideration, there would be numerous backdoor conversations with President Trump about the reasons that it would perhaps not be a good idea.
But, you know, there are other people. I think, you know, I would probably look less in the state government and more members of the U.S. House. Particularly, someone like Michael McCaul, I think would be a natural for [the Department of] Homeland Security, for instance.
MORE WITH MARK JONES: Key Local Election Races and Ballot Issues: What’s at stake in Alvin ISD, Spring ISD, Sugar Land