Breckenridge Texan

The governor no longer believes in a bedrock conservative value.

Editor’s Note: This column originally appeared in The Dallas Morning News, where Glenn Rogers is a contributing columnist.

By Glenn Rogers

According to Merriam-Webster, flip-flopping is simply defined as suddenly or frequently changing one’s opinion. Voters often give this label to politicians, but normal people can also be flip floppers. As a veterinarian, I have flip-flopped several times over my approach to handling certain animal diseases. 

The flip-flops occurred because of the attainment of experiences and new information. Sometimes these revelations lead me to take a different or even opposite approach in my practice. Likewise, even politicians may flip-flop due to current information or changing dynamics. Most important, whether flip-flopping is positive or negative can be determined by whether the flip-flopper provides a plausible reason for the change (other than trying to get elected). Failure to adequately explain the reason for the change, or even denying a change occurred, moves flip-flopping from acceptable to deceitful.

In November 2025, Gov. Greg Abbott declared his state the “epicenter of AI development” while announcing a $40 billion investment by Google. Less than a year later, Abbott halted approvals of some 1,800 new data centers, worth billions of dollars, on concerns that they use too much power and water. Was this flip-flop based on response to added information and genuine concern or a pre-election tactic to appease voters? The flip-flop on data centers is curious, but there is another Abbott flip-flop that also deserves voters’ close attention.

In May 2014, during his first campaign for governor, then-Attorney General Greg Abbott wrote a guest column for the Waco Tribune-Herald wherein he made several statements that were either deceptive campaign rhetoric or his actual beliefs, prior to a major flip flop once assuming office. In the op-ed he stated that as governor he would “return control of our schools to the districts and the communities served.” Abbott further opined that “the public education system is too centralized. One-size-fits-all solutions are pushed down from the top. We have too many unnecessary, unfunded mandates from Austin that tie the hands of our educators.”  He went on to support a policy where the state would “set high standards, provide the tools for success, then get out of the way.”  Unbelievably, he even stated, “As governor, I will establish genuine local control by giving school districts operational flexibility.”

Yet now, our state government mandates countless expensive requirements on local schools without providing enough money to cover the cost. In the past year, the state took over multiple Independent school districts, replacing local elected school board trustees with state-appointed trustees.

Texas was not adequately funding the public school system we already had, nonetheless Abbott created another system for taxpayers to fund: $1 billion for vouchers in the first biennial budget with estimates approaching $4 billion a year by 2030. The governor rammed this program through the Legislature after his campaign received $10 million dollars from Pennsylvanian TikTok investor and school privatization activist Jeff Yass.

Over the last 12 years, our governor has been the most anti-public education governor in Texas history. Abbott-appointed Texas Education Agency Commissioner Mike Morath, the second longest serving in Texas history, has facilitated a burgeoning state bureaucracy and drastically increased teacher mandates, many unfunded. Unfunded mandates on public schools and local governmental entities function as state-imposed property tax increases.There has been a mass exodus of qualified teachers and an unprecedented epidemic of school closures.

Abbott’s earlier positions in support of local control seemed to mesh with his well-established record as attorney general of fighting federal overreach during the Obama administration. Logic at the time suggested that his philosophy of limited government at the federal level would extend to state government and was consistent with the then-longstanding local control philosophy of the Republican Party. The governor I voted for and supported claimed to desire more control by local governmental entities, which include locally elected school boards and various city and county governmental bodies.

Early in his first term, at an event with the Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute,  Abbott stated, “For us to be able to continue our legacy of economic freedom, it was necessary that we begin to speak up and to propose laws to limit the ability of cities to California-ize the great state of Texas.” Abbott went further, stating that Texas should issue a “ban across the board” on municipal regulations. Since that time, Abbott has frequently pushed for stricter state oversight, funding penalties, and tighter caps on local governments. One powerful group that Abbott has aligned with, the Texas Public Policy Foundation, under the leadership of billionaire megadonor Tim Dunn, pushes for policies designed to eliminate local control. They find more and more success each legislative session.

So much for local control.

While there was a good argument for reigning in some “outta” control, mostly urban, political subdivisions, the punishment administered has been across the board. Over 75% of Texas counties and 90% of Texas municipal governments (cities) meet standard state and federal definitions for being rural. Unfunded mandates typically exert a more deleterious effect on smaller entities which are unable to absorb the addition of additional state-imposed regulations.

The hostility toward our cities, schools and counties and the disdain for local control did not exist at the Texas Capitol before Abbott became governor. This is Abbott’s legacy.

When I naively decided to run for state representative in 2019 simply to represent the underrepresented needs of rural Texas, I thought local control was still a Republican tenet. My experience had been as a consistent Republican voter, but with no intra-party involvement and limited awareness of more recent party positions. My consistent campaign statement, “I believe in limited government, both federal and state … and local control” was criticized by my fringe right opponents and was, in retrospect, outdated. On arriving in Austin, I was informed as a member of the Texas Conservative Coalition that conservative Republicans believe in limited government at the federal level, yet no longer emphasized local control, but rather individual liberties (from local regulations).

I certainly support individual liberties but remain baffled at the loss of emphasis on limiting state government. Why is growing state government and bureaucracy any more acceptable than the exponential growth in our federal government? Continued deterioration of local control for school districts and continued growth of statewide bureaucracy is not conservative.

Vouchers lead to more centralized control over education funding, shifting resources  from local oversight to state-level mandates. True conservatism supports decentralization and putting “the people” in control of their local communities, not distant Austin bureaucrats.

Abbott launched his campaign for governor 12 years ago with the promise of supporting public schools and increasing local control. In the most massive flip flop in Texas history, he has done just the opposite, at the behest of billionaire megadonors and contrary to the needs of Texas citizens.

Glenn Rogers is a rancher and veterinarian in Palo Pinto County. He served in the Texas House of Representatives from 2021 to 2025, representing Stephens County. He is a Dallas Morning News contributing columnist.