2026 Midterm Results: Ohio and Texas Senate Polls Put Cannabis Policy Records in Focus

Burn After Reading The 30-second intel for operators and investors ⏱ 0:30

Voters decide competitive Senate races in Ohio and Texas on November 3, with outcomes that shape the next Congress's handling of cannabis banking, tax reform and hemp. In Ohio, Sherrod Brown, who chaired the committee that advanced SAFER Banking in 2023, seeks a return.

• Operators: Federal cannabis banking relief remains unresolved, and no single winner guarantees it. Watch the final composition of Congress, committee leadership and legislative priorities before assuming any change to banking or tax conditions.
• Investors: Polls in both races conflict, and past positions do not guarantee future votes. The more concrete signals come after Election Day: Congress's makeup, committee appointments and the legislative priorities that emerge.
• Do now: Review your banking and tax exposure to federal policy, and set a reminder to track committee leadership announcements once the new Congress's composition is confirmed.

Short on time? You’re done. Want the numbers?Keep reading ↓

With voters heading to the polls Tuesday, competitive Senate races in Ohio and Texas are drawing attention to candidates whose records and positions could matter for federal cannabis legislation in the next Congress.

The November 3 midterm elections will determine the composition of the next Congress, including the lawmakers responsible for considering cannabis banking legislation, federal tax reform, and other industry priorities.

Two Senate contests illustrate why the outcome matters beyond the overall balance of power.

In Ohio, former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown is seeking to return to Washington against Republican incumbent Jon Husted. In Texas, Democratic state Rep. James Talarico is challenging Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton for the seat being vacated by Sen. John Cornyn.

Both contests have attracted competitive polling, although surveys differ on the size and direction of the candidates’ advantages.

For cannabis businesses and investors, the relevant question is how the election could change the membership of Congress and the legislative records represented in the Senate.

Ohio: A Former Senate Banking Chairman Seeks a Return

Brown’s candidacy carries a direct connection to federal cannabis banking legislation.

During his previous Senate tenure, Brown chaired the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, which advanced the SAFER Banking Act in September 2023.

That legislation sought to reduce the risk of federal penalties for financial institutions providing services to state-legal cannabis businesses.

Brown’s previous involvement provides a documented connection between the Ohio election and an issue that remains unresolved for the industry.

Polling shows a competitive race, although individual surveys have produced different results.

An October 9–13 survey conducted by Democratic firm New River Strategies and Republican firm GS Strategy Group for The Cook Political Report found Brown at 49% and Husted at 43%, a six-percentage-point advantage for Brown.

More recent surveys have been less consistent. The 270toWin Ohio polling tracker lists a November 2 Emerson College survey showing Husted ahead 48% to 46%, while an AtlasIntel survey ending the same day placed Brown ahead 51% to 44%.

The variation underscores why a single poll should not be treated as an election forecast.

Husted’s record also warrants attention. His positions on medical cannabis, adult-use legalization, and financial services should be assessed separately rather than treated as a single position on cannabis reform.

The election will determine which politician represents Ohio in this Senate seat, but neither candidate’s victory would guarantee the advancement of cannabis banking legislation.

Texas: Cannabis Policy Enters a Competitive Senate Contest

In Texas, Talarico and Paxton offer another opportunity to examine how candidates’ existing policy positions could translate into federal representation.

Talarico, a Democratic state legislator, has addressed cannabis policy during his political career, while Paxton’s record as Texas attorney general provides a different perspective on the regulation and enforcement of cannabis and hemp laws.

The University of Texas/Texas Politics Project survey, conducted September 25–October 5, found Talarico at 50% and Paxton at 47% among likely voters, a three-point difference.

A subsequent Cook Political Report survey, conducted October 9–13, showed Talarico at 49% and Paxton at 44%, a five-point difference.

Other surveys have reported narrower margins or ties, reinforcing the uncertainty surrounding the race.

The candidates’ cannabis positions are also documented in an October 13 Texas Tribune candidate questionnaire, which addressed THC policy. Talarico responded to the publication’s questions, while the Tribune relied on Paxton’s previous public statements to describe his positions.

For the cannabis industry, the importance of the Texas election extends beyond the state’s own regulatory framework.

The winning candidate will participate in federal debates over cannabis and hemp legislation, including measures that could affect companies operating across multiple states.

What the Polls Tell Cannabis Investors — and What They Don’t

The Ohio and Texas races demonstrate why congressional elections deserve attention from an industry accustomed to following regulatory developments.

In Ohio, the election involves a former Senate Banking Committee chairman with a direct record on cannabis banking legislation.

In Texas, voters are choosing between candidates with distinct public records on cannabis and hemp policy.

But polling advantages do not establish election outcomes, and candidates’ previous positions do not guarantee their future votes.

The next Congress will also operate under procedural and political constraints that extend beyond individual senators, including committee assignments, legislative leadership, and the support required to pass federal legislation.

For operators and investors, the most concrete development to monitor after Election Day will be the actual composition of Congress, followed by the appointment of committee leaders and the legislative priorities that emerge.

The implications of the 2026 midterm results for cannabis businesses and investors will become clearer as the next Congress takes shape. Those developments, alongside federal regulatory changes, capital markets, and the industry’s evolving relationship with Washington, will be part of the conversation at IgniteIt’s Cannabis Capital & Policy Summit in Washington, D.C., on November 18.