Texas seems to want to compete with North Carolina in the "let's slap an interstate shield on every road we can find" contest. At least NC isn't using those ridiculous suffixes
NC is the worst. I'm glad all states aren't doing that. If Oklahoma did that, the BA would be I-144, US 64/412 west of Tulsa would be either part of I-144 or possibly I-344 if not a 2di. The Muskogee and Cimarron Turnpikes are below interstate standards so it would take the grandfather clause for them to be interstates, and then there is an at-grade on 64/412 near Keystone Lake in the brief Osage County part of the road. US 75 would also be an odd x44, and OK 11 would be I-644. The Creek Turnpike, which is built to I-standards would be I-844 instead of secret OK 364.
I'll give you that Texas doesn't need all the I-69 branches, but I'd rather have TXDOT apply for many more Interstate designations that actually make sense within the system (Loop 45, Sam Houston...) Why all the hate against NC? Sure, the routing of I-73/74 is stupid as it is, but a Mount Airy-Myrtle Beach Interstate does make sense. As does a Hendersonville-Wilmington Interstate.
To be honest, I can appreciate North Carolina being proactive, though I'll admit that they are a bit too proactive (I-74). I don't mind the suffixed I-69s, but ideally:
I-69C -> I-169 or I-33 (even if it's east of I-35)
I-69E -> I-37 reroute/extension or just I-69
US-59/TX-44 -> I-6
US-59 between Freer-George West -> I-x06 or I-x69
If suffixes have to stay, I-69C -> I-69W while I-69E remains, as does my I-6 and x06 or x69. US-59 between Freer and George West can then be an I-x69 or I-x06. But I'll hold out hope that Laredo-Corpus Christi becomes I-6.
In that vein and without going too much into detail (re: Molandfreak), Loop 289 should become an even I-x27. But enough of that tangent here.