Schumer demands investigation of Trump Weather Service vacancies in wake of Texas flooding
Schumer wrote in a Monday letter to Roderick Anderson, the Commerce Department's acting inspector general, urging him to immediately 'open an investigation into the scope, breadth, and ramifications of whether staffing shortages at key local National Weather Service (NWS) stations contributed to the catastrophic loss of life and property during the deadly flooding.'
He noted that The New York Times reported that key forecasting and coordination positions at the San Antonio and San Angelo offices of the NWS were vacant at the time of the Friday storm.
Those local offices were missing a warning coordination meteorologist, a science officer and a senior hydrologist, among other 'vital forecasting, meteorology and coordination roles.'
'These are the experts responsible for modeling storm impacts, monitoring rising water levels, issuing flood warnings, and coordinating directly with local emergency managers about when to warn the public and issue evacuation orders,' Schumer wrote.
'To put it plainly: they help save lives,' he added.
Schumer is asking for the Commerce Department to investigate whether the staffing vacancies at the San Antonio and San Angelo offices contributed to delays, gaps or diminished accuracy of the forecasts related to the July 4 flooding.
He wants to know whether those vacancies delayed or weakened the issuance of flood warnings.
And he wants information on whether reduced staffing impeded the weather service's ability to coordinate with local emergency officials, including in Kerr County, where floodwaters swept through an all-girls Christian summer camp, killing at least 27 campers and counselors.
'This is a national tragedy which people across the country are mourning. The American people deserve answers,' he wrote.
Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) raised similar questions during an interview with CNN's Dana Bash on Sunday, calling for an investigation into what impact weather service staffing cuts had on the local preparation for the floods.
'When you have flash flooding, there's a risk that you won't have the personnel to make that — do that analysis, do the predictions in the best way,' he said.
'And it could lead to tragedy. So, I don't want to sit here and say conclusively that that was the case, but I do think that it should be investigated,' he said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Government shutdown talk is starting early ahead of a difficult funding fight in Congress this fall
WASHINGTON — It's become tradition. Congressional leaders from both major political parties blame each other for a potential government shutdown as the budget year draws to a close. But this year, the posturing is starting extraordinarily early. The finger-pointing with more than two months to go in the fiscal year indicates the threat of a stoppage is more serious than usual as a Republican-controlled Congress seeks to make good on its policy priorities, often with no support from the other political party. Democratic leadership from both chambers and the two panels responsible for drafting spending bills met behind closed doors recently to discuss the strategy ahead. The leaders emerged demanding that Republicans work with them but were careful to avoid spelling out red lines if Republicans don't. 'We are for a bipartisan, bicameral bill. That's what always has been done,' said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer. 'The onus is on the Republicans to help us make that happen.' On the Republican side, lawmakers describe the Democrats as itching for a shutdown. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Schumer had threatened a shutdown should Republicans pass a bill to roll back $9 billion in public broadcasting and foreign aid funds. Republicans subsequently passed those cuts. 'It was disturbing to see the Democratic leader implicitly threatening to shut down the government in his July 'Dear Colleague' letter, but I'm hopeful that he does not represent the views of Senate Democrats as a whole,' Thune said. The federal government is operating on a full-year continuing resolution that provided about $1.7 trillion in spending for defense and non-defense programs. The funding expires Sept. 30. President Donald Trump requested a comparable amount for the coming fiscal year, but the Republican proposed dramatically overhauling how that money is distributed to include more for defense and border security and significantly less for health, education, housing and foreign assistance. So far, the House has approved two of the 12 annual spending bills. The Senate has yet to approve any, but those bills that have advanced out of the Senate Appropriations Committee are enjoying bipartisan support while the House bills are generally advancing out of committee on party line votes. This week, the Senate is expected to consider the appropriations bill to fund military construction projects and the Department of Veterans Affairs, generally one of the easier spending bills to pass. One or two others could get added to the package. Congress got off to a late start on the funding process. Republicans prioritized Trump's tax and spending cut bill. Most lawmakers agree Congress will need to pass a stop-gap measure before Sept. 30 to avoid a shutdown and allow lawmakers more time to work on the full-year spending measures. Democrats overwhelmingly opposed this year's funding bill that expires in two months. But in the end, Schumer and nine Democratic colleagues decided a government shutdown would be even worse. They voted to allow the bill to proceed and overcome a filibuster, giving Republicans the ability to pass it on their own on a final vote. Schumer took considerable heat from progressives for his strategy. House Democratic leadership issued a statement at the time saying 'House Democrats will not be complicit.' And members of his own caucus publicly expressed disagreement. 'If we pass this continuing resolution for the next half year, we will own what the president does,' said Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. 'I am not willing to take ownership of that.' Some liberal groups threatened to hold protests at various events Schumer was planning to promote a new book, and some of those events ended up being postponed due to security concerns. The Democratic frustrations have only grown stronger in the ensuing months. First, the Democrats watched the Trump administration slow-walk or block hundreds of billions of dollars from going out in part through the work of its Department of Government Efficiency. Then they watched as Republicans passed Trump's big tax and spending cut bill without any Democratic votes. Finally, they watched as Republicans this month canceled $9 billion in foreign aid and public broadcasting funds when much of it had been previously agreed to on a bipartisan basis. Meanwhile, Trump's director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russ Vought, declared that the appropriations process 'has to be less bipartisan.' Democrats complain that much of the work taking place in the House has been a waste of time, since those partisan bills have no chance of getting 60 votes in the 100-member Senate. 'At this point in time, why have appropriations if they can just unilaterally through rescissions whack it all away?' said Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill. 'I think what you're seeing is more frustration than I've ever witnessed.' Republicans control all the levers of power in Washington. That could make it harder to blame Democrats for a shutdown. But in the end, any bill will need some Democratic support to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. 'Our concern is that from their standpoint, they want to have a shutdown,' Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., said of Democrats. '… The Democrats see it as a way to derail the agenda that we're putting through.' Sen. John Barrasso, the No. 2-ranked Republican in the Senate, said Republicans were determined to hold votes on the 12 spending bills. He said that Schumer 'had unilaterally shut down the appropriations process' in previous years by not holding such votes, moving instead to negotiate directly with GOP leadership in the House and then-President Joe Biden's Democratic administration on an all-encompassing spending package. 'If Democrats walk away from this process again, simply to protect wasteful Washington spending,' Barrasso said, 'they will be the ones sabotaging the Senate and shutting down the government.'
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
Chart Reveals True Cost of Trump's Tariffs
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Consumer inflation data has yet to reveal any major cost effects of President Donald Trump's trade policies, leading many to downgrade their predictions of a tariff-induced price spiral in the near future. But a working paper, entitled "Tracking the Short-Run Price Impact of U.S. Tariffs," has charted those that the administration's trade policies have already affected. One of its authors told Newsweek that the impacts, though delayed for now, may begin to significantly impact household budgets later this year. Newsweek reached out to the Commerce Department and the Council of Economic Advisers via email outside of regular hours for comment. Why It Matters The so far muted impact of tariffs on inflation and consumer spending has puzzled certain economists and led political commentators, notably talk show host Bill Maher, to recant their previous criticisms of the president's economic strategies. Citing this fact, and the over $100 billion in tax revenue tariffs have accrued, the administration has declared these to be both harmless and a resounding success for the United States economy and its global trade leverage. However, many experts still caution that the full effects of tariffs will be gradual rather than immediate. Due to a range of interrelated factors—inventory buffers, supply chain adjustments and amendments to announced or threatened duties—they argue that the costs to the American consumer will surface more clearly over time. What To Know The paper was authored by Alberto Cavallo of Harvard University, alongside Paola Llamas and Franco Vazquez of Universidad de San Andrés. As shown on the chart below, based on data from the four largest retailers in the U.S., the trio found that the price of imported goods has risen sharply since February. Domestic goods also saw an increase, albeit "more gradual and steady," which the authors said was due to the reliance of even U.S.-made products on imported components subject to new tariffs. A chart showing how prices of imported and domestic goods have changed amid President Trump's tariff announcements, from the working paper entitled "Tracking the Short-Run Price Impact of U.S. Tariffs." A chart showing how prices of imported and domestic goods have changed amid President Trump's tariff announcements, from the working paper entitled "Tracking the Short-Run Price Impact of U.S. Tariffs." Albert Cavallo, Paola Llamas, Franco Vazquez "We observed rapid price responses to trade war and tariff-related news, with average price increases of about 3 percent for imported products since February," said Alberto Cavallo, a professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School. "These increases were largely driven by goods from China, particularly in categories such as household goods, furniture, and electronics." However, Cavallo told Newsweek that the retail price impacts have so far remained modest when compared with the actual size of the tariffs that were announced over this period. Despite confusing some, Cavallo said this is in line with trends observed during the U.S.-China trade war in 2018-2019, when "prices at the border rose quickly, but pass-through to retail prices was slow and uneven." "A similar dynamic appears to be unfolding now," he said. "U.S. firms are experiencing higher import costs, as suggested by stable or rising import prices, but have not yet passed most of these increases on to consumers." The researchers identified several reasons why higher import costs may not have yet translated into higher prices. These include retailers "front-running" or stocking up on inventory ahead of a scheduled tariff hike, the uncertainty surrounding the duration and level of the tariffs that have been subject to constant revision and negotiation, as well as the potentially disastrous "consumer backlash" companies could face if they immediately raised prices to mitigate higher import costs. "The high level of uncertainty is likely leading firms to delay price adjustments. Overall, we expect the passthrough to retail prices to be gradual and uneven," Cavallo said, adding that firms are likely to pass on costs to consumers "gradually over time, which means that the inflation rate can be higher for several months." What People Are Saying White House economic adviser Stephen Miran, earlier this month on Fox News: "What we did is we looked at every category in the inflation what we find imported goods are actually getting cheaper." Alberto Cavallo, Thomas S. Murphy Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School, told Newsweek: "As the graph shows, each time there was news suggesting rising trade tensions, prices tended to increase. When the news pointed to easing tensions (e.g., with the China pause), prices generally stabilized or declined. So I do expect announcements about trade deals to continue influencing prices. Whether that accelerates passthrough to consumers will depend on how high and how long-lasting the tariffs are expected to be." What Happens Next As Cavallo noted, trade deals recently signed and the prospect of a more fully-fledged agreement with China could lessen the overall impact of tariffs on imported goods prices. However, alongside these negotiations, Trump has continued to threaten higher tariffs on countries such as Brazil, while also stating that the global baseline rate on countries unable to secure a deal could rise to between 15 and 20 percent.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Jewish Democratic senators lead pressure on Trump to address Gaza crisis
A group of prominent Jewish Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) and Sen. Adam Schiff (Calif.), are leading an effort to press the Trump administration to secure a ceasefire agreement in Gaza and address what they called a 'humanitarian crisis.' The push comes amid reports that Palestinians are dying from malnutrition in the war-torn enclave. Schumer, Schiff, Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), the chief deputy Democratic whip, and Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), spearheaded a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff warning that situation in Gaza is 'unsustainable and worsens by the day' and that 'hunger and malnutrition are widespread,' leading to deaths from starvation, especially among children.' They are among 40 Senate Democrats who signed the letter, including Sens. Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (Conn.), Chris Coons (Del.), Dick Durbin (Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) and Chris Murphy (Conn.). The Democratic senators wrote that the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the American non-profit organization established to distribute food aid in Gaza, 'has failed to address the deepening humanitarian crisis and contributed to an unacceptable and mounting civilian death toll around the organization's sites.' The United Nations' human rights office reported recently that more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces since May while trying to pick up food supplies at the official distribution sites. The Democratic lawmakers are calling on the Trump administration to push for a 'large-scale expansion' of humanitarian assistance and services throughout Gaza and to use 'experienced multilateral bodies and NGOs' to distribute the aid. They also reiterated their views that 'a permanent end to this war will also require an end to Hamas rule in Gaza and ensuring that Hamas can no longer pose a serious military threat to Israel.' The group reaffirmed their support for U.S.-led diplomacy with Israeli and Palestinian leaders in pursuit of 'the long-term goal of a negotiated two-state solution with Israelis and Palestinians living side by side in lasting peace, security, dignity and mutual recognition.' The Democrats expressed 'strong opposition' to the permanent forced displacement of Palestinians in Gaza, warning that 'would be antithetical to international humanitarian law' and a 'sustainable end to this war that prioritizes the long-term safety and security of Israelis and Palestinians.' And they voiced strong support of diplomatic efforts to return all hostages held by Hamas and the return of remains of those presumed dead, including Americans Omer Neutra and Itay Chen, to their families and loved ones.
