logo
Water bills face deadline threat as Texas lawmakers negotiate spending priorities

Water bills face deadline threat as Texas lawmakers negotiate spending priorities

Yahoo22-05-2025

Texas is running out of water. And Texas lawmakers are running out of time to solve the problem.
With just days left until the legislative session ends, two key pieces of legislation await key votes in the state House and Senate.
The two pieces of legislation, Senate Bill 7 and House Joint Resolution 7, are supposed to work together to spend billions of dollars to save the state's water supply. Despite Gov. Greg Abbott declaring water an emergency item at the start of the legislative session, which means the bills can be fast-tracked, lawmakers, water agencies, and advocacy groups have reached an impasse on how to spend the money.
'This is a priority for leadership. It is going to have to be negotiated,' said Perry Fowler, executive director of the Texas Water Infrastructure Network. 'This is big, important policy. It is not easy stuff. You end up getting some bumps and bruises.'
A Texas 2036 report estimated that the state needs nearly $154 billion by 2050 for water infrastructure, including $59 billion for water supply projects, $74 billion for leaky pipes and infrastructure maintenance, and $21 billion to fix broken wastewater systems.
If the bills are approved — and voters agree in the fall —the state will spend about $10 billion over the next decade.
The Senate bill would create the administrative framework for how water projects would be funded under the Texas Water Development Board. It also establishes two new oversight bodies: the Texas Water Fund Advisory Committee and the Office of Water Supply Conveyance Coordination.
Recent changes to the bill have expanded its scope to include programs like the Flood Infrastructure Fund, the Economically Distressed Areas Program, and the Agricultural Water Conservation Fund.
The Senate bill, sponsored by state Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, passed the upper chamber and is now in the House. A floor debate by the full chamber could happen as soon as May 23. The final deadline for the House to give preliminary approval to Senate bills is May 27.
The House resolution, sponsored by state Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palestine, is where the real tension lies. The resolution proposes a constitutional amendment that would dedicate up to $1 billion per year to the Texas Water Fund for the next decade — money that would allow local governments and water providers to build supply and fix aging systems.
The resolution passed the House and was referred to a Senate committee. Perry proposed changes to the resolution that spell out how the money is to be spent.
Water policy experts, lobbyists, and environmental groups have raised concerns about the rigid funding formula. Sarah Kirkle, policy director at the Texas Water Conservation Association, said the allocation formula remains the main hurdle between the two chambers.
'The biggest conversations between the House and Senate will be focused on how much of the dedicated funding goes to new supply projects versus a wider range of project types, that includes other water supply projects, wastewater projects, potentially flood projects, and all of our infrastructure repair and replacement projects,' she said.
Originally, the House proposal gave the water board broad discretion over how to spend the money. The options can broadly be divided into two categories. New water supply: desalinating brackish groundwater and marine water to make it drinkable, 'shovel-ready' reservoirs and constructing pipelines to transport water across the state. The other, leaky pipes: repairing the state's old and deteriorating water infrastructure.
The Senate amendment now mandates that 80% of the money goes to new water supply projects, such as desalination, while only 20% would be reserved for repairs, conservation, and flood mitigation. This split has become the flashpoint of the legislative debate.
At the hearing, Perry strongly advocated for what he calls a 'long-term water supply' plan that prioritizes new water supply projects over infrastructure repairs.
He defended the split, saying that fixing every leak in that state would not be enough water recovered to solve the state's future supply challenges. Perry said that if the split doesn't favor water supply, big cities will take all the funding and 'the state would have missed an opportunity with the limited funds available to actually address a supply need that is critical to continue the Texas Miracle for decades to come.'
He argued that with this plan he is protecting all interests in the state's 254 counties and guaranteeing rural areas will benefit and not get left behind.
'That's why I'm heavily weighted on supply,' he said.
Many argue that the prescriptive split undermines local flexibility and shifts too much attention toward new water supply projects, desalination and pipelines, at the expense of urgently needed repairs to infrastructure or flooding mitigation.
Fowler said the state's top three leaders – Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and House Speaker Dustin Burrows — are aligned with having no split and letting the water board determine what is best. He added that there will need to be a 'reasonable compromise with Sen. Perry to keep [legislation] moving forward.'
Andrew Mahaleris, Abbott's spokesman, didn't say if the governor had a preference on how the money is spent. However, Mahaleris said the governor wants to make 'the largest investment in water in Texas history' so the state can do both.
The state 'must also invest in new water supply strategies that develop resources like desalination facilities and transportation infrastructure and ensure rural Texas communities have the resources to maintain existing water systems,' Mahaleris said.
He assured that the governor will continue to work with Perry and Harris on the legislation.
Burrows also did not comment on the split.
'By providing the resources and funding for critical water supply infrastructure projects, the state is taking a proactive approach to keeping up with population growth and ensuring Texas communities are able to have their water needs met,' he said in a statement.
'I look forward to a thoughtful debate when Senate Bill 7 comes to the House floor later this week,' he said.
Patrick's office did not return a request for comment.
Jennifer Walker, director for the Texas Coast and Water program with the National Wildlife Federation, said she thinks the split will change.
'I don't think it's gonna be 80/20… I would prefer no split,' Walker said. 'I don't think that's realistic. But we have to reject this false narrative that only projects labeled as 'new supply' can secure our water future.'
Walker and other water experts said negotiations over the split are ongoing.
'It's gotten real quiet,' she said. 'It does make me nervous. Time is running out.'
Despite the debate, most of the organizations supporting the bills believe the proposals will ultimately pass.
'Water has been a key priority for much of state leadership this session. I have a lot of faith that they're going to be able to advance both pieces of legislation,' Kirkle said.
The Senate committee must advance the House bill before May 24.
'I can't imagine anyone being okay with this falling apart,' Fowler said. 'It needs to get resolved.'
If both chambers pass their respective versions, the bills will move to a conference committee, where the most contentious decisions will be made out of public view, behind the scenes.
There lawmakers will need to reconcile their differences. If they do, the decision will ultimately fall to Texas voters, who will decide in November whether to approve the new constitutional amendment.
Disclosure: Texas 2036 and Conservation Fund have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Sunday shows preview: Trump-Musk spat leaves admin reeling; ‘Big, beautiful bill' hits speed bump
Sunday shows preview: Trump-Musk spat leaves admin reeling; ‘Big, beautiful bill' hits speed bump

Yahoo

time33 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Sunday shows preview: Trump-Musk spat leaves admin reeling; ‘Big, beautiful bill' hits speed bump

President Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk's feud spilled out in public on Thursday, with the world's richest man and the world's most powerful leader trading barbs that engulfed news cycles in Washington and abroad. Musk, a Trump ally, was vocal about his disappointment with Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' currently sitting in the Senate. Musk, who spent millions during the 2024 presidential campaign to help elect Trump, called the massive piece of legislation a 'disgusting abomination.' Trump then weighed in on Thursday at the White House during German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's visit, saying, 'Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore.' The spat intensified, with Musk floating the prospects of creating a third party, claiming that without his political contributions, Trump would not be victorious against ex-Vice President Harris in November and accusing the president of having ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump threatened to cut off federal contracts awarded to Musk's companies. Later on Thursday, Musk signaled he might be open to brokering a truce with the commander-in-chief. After speaking with several news outlets Friday morning, Trump suggested he is ready to move on and indicated that he will not be speaking with Musk for a while. Trump told CNN Friday morning that he is 'not even thinking about Elon' and added that the SpaceX and Tesla CEO has 'got a problem. The poor guy's got a problem.' In the Senate, Trump's agenda bill, which passed the House chamber last month, has sparked concerns and criticism from GOP senators. The first group of GOP Sens., which consists of Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), are arguing they could vote against the bill if it slashes Medicaid benefits. Others, including Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) have previously said they would not back the legislation if it retains the current debt and spending levels. The GOP can have three defections total if all Democrats vote against the legislation. Sen. Johnson will be on CNN's 'State of the Union where he will likely discuss if any of his concerns regarding the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' have been addressed. As part of a push to root out waste, fraud and abuse within Medicare, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said this week that a bill sponsored by Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), that would crack down on Medicare Advantage overpayments known as 'upcoding,' could be inserted into Trump's massive legislation. Cassidy will be on NewsNation's 'The Hill Sunday,' where he will likely discuss the latest on the reconciliation package along with his recent visit to the White House. NewsNation's 'The Hill Sunday': Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.); Rep. Sarah Elfreth (D-Ma); U.S. Chamber of Commerce chief policy officer Neil Bradley. ABC's 'This Week': Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy; House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.). NBC's 'Meet the Press': Sens. James Lankford (R-Okla.), and Cory Booker (D-N.J.). CNN's 'State of the Union': 'Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), and Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.); Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.). CBS' 'Face the Nation': National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett; Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.); Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas); Save the Children U.S. President and CEO Janti Soeripto. 'Fox News Sunday': Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought; Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.); Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas). Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures': White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt; Secretary Of Interior Doug Burgum, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.); House Ways And Means Committee Chairman Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.); Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.). Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump threatens 'very serious consequences' if Elon Musk finances Republican challengers
Trump threatens 'very serious consequences' if Elon Musk finances Republican challengers

USA Today

time2 hours ago

  • USA Today

Trump threatens 'very serious consequences' if Elon Musk finances Republican challengers

Trump threatens 'very serious consequences' if Elon Musk finances Republican challengers The threat culminated a week of clashes between Trump and Musk over federal policy. Show Caption Hide Caption Six takeaways from the President Donald Trump, Elon Musk feud From disappointment to threats, here are six takeaways from the public spat between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Trump told NBC News there would be 'very serious consequences' if Musk financed challenges to Republicans who support his legislative priorities. Musk, who contributed nearly $300 million to help Republicans including Trump win the 2024 election, has harshly criticized the legislative package. President Donald Trump said his former adviser, billionaire Elon Musk, would face 'very serious consequences' if he financed candidates to challenge Republicans who support the president's legislative package for tax cuts and border security. 'If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that,' Trump told NBC News on June 7. He declined to share what those would be. 'He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that.' The rupture between the world's most powerful man and the world's richest man reaches far beyond their own relationship. Musk contributed nearly $300 million to help Republicans, including Trump, win the 2024 elections. He was a special White House adviser recommending ways to dismantle federal agencies and lay off workers. Trump thanked him repeatedly for his service and presented him with a gold key in the Oval Office on May 30. But in the week after, Musk harshly called the House-passed legislative package of Trump's top priorities a "disgusting abomination" and urged lawmakers to kill it, as the Senate debates the measure. In response, Trump has already threatened to cancel Musk's government subsidies for electric carmaker Tesla and contracts for rocket company SpaceX. Trump said he thought Musk turned on him because the legislation would end subsidies for electric vehicles and because Trump discarded Musk's choice to lead NASA. Musk replied by threatening to shut down the Dragon spacecraft program that helps the U.S. transport astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station. Trump has seemingly tried to temper his public comments about Musk, wishing his companies well. But he told reporters on Air Force One on June 6 that retaliation was possible. 'He's got a lot of money. He gets a lot of subsidy, so we'll take a look at that,' Trump said. 'Only if it's fair for him and for the country, I would certainly think about it. But it has to be fair.'

Democrats see political trap in Trump's Biden probe
Democrats see political trap in Trump's Biden probe

The Hill

time3 hours ago

  • The Hill

Democrats see political trap in Trump's Biden probe

Democrats are warning members of their party not to fall into a political trap after President Trump ordered an investigation into former President Biden's mental state and executive actions at the end of his term. Trump directed his counsel, in consultation with the attorney general, to probe 'whether certain individuals conspired to deceive the public about Biden's mental state' amid renewed scrutiny of his predecessor's age and health in the lead-up to last year's election. The probe threatens to keep an issue in the news that Democrats would like to move on from and could force them into the uncomfortable position of having to defend Biden despite his unpopularity. 'We need to avoid taking the bait for a totally unfounded political stunt, which is what this investigation is,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). 'It's a distraction from the problems that everyday Americans face in our economy: tariffs, rising prices and the 'Great Big, Beautiful Bill.'' Biden also cast the play as a distraction from controversy swirling around the current White House, pushing back sharply against Trump's suggestion that he was not the one making the decisions from the Oval Office. Trump's call for an investigation fixates on Biden's use of an autopen to sign executive actions, claiming that, if advisers 'secretly used' the mechanism 'to conceal his incapacity,' it would constitute an unconstitutional wielding of presidential power. 'Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency,' Biden said in a statement. 'This is nothing more than a distraction by Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans who are working to push disastrous legislation that would cut essential programs like Medicaid and raise costs on American families, all to pay for tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy and big corporations.' On Capitol Hill, where Trump's House-passed spending bill is hitting snags in the Senate as Elon Musk feuds with Trump and calls to kill the legislation, other Democrats are echoing that framing. 'He's clearly trying to deflect attention from the disastrous effect he's had on the US economy,' said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.). 'He only brings up Joe Biden when he's really worried about something, like 'Vladimir Putin is playing me and the world sees it. My tariffs thing is not working out.'' 'So I would say, give it as little attention as possible,' Kaine said, suggesting Democrats should turn the inquiry around on Trump and say, ''You're the president now. What about your evidence of mental decline?'' Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Ruben Gallego (D-N.M.) concurred that the move is a distraction from the bill and that Democrats should respond by drawing Americans' focus to the budget concerns instead. Engaging could also risk legitimizing some of Trump's claims about the end of Biden's term, suggested Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright. He called the push for an investigation 'a distraction pitch that Donald Trump is trying to throw down at the batter's box, hoping somebody will swing at it.' 'Anytime we fall into the trap, then we trap our own selves,' Seawright said of Democrats. 'We should focus on this moment and not try to get caught up into conversations that don't gain us anything electorally or politically.' Questions about Biden's age and health dogged him along the 2024 campaign trail, contributing to his eventual exit from the race. Trump, who railed against his two-time rival as 'Sleepy Joe' as they jostled for the White House, has continued to raise the issue, while Democrats seek to turn the page and look toward the midterms and 2028. Trump has repeatedly blasted Biden over his autopen use, questioning whether orders signed by his predecessor — including 11th-hour preemptive pardons for his family members and others to protect against 'politically motivated prosecutions' — are void as a result. The White House confirmed this week that the Department of Justice is reviewing Biden's pardons. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has also started its own inquiry into what Republicans have cast as a 'mental decline cover up.' This week, Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) demanded interviews from some of Biden's former top aides as well as his doctor, Kevin O'Connor. At the same time, new books, including 'Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again' from CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios' Alex Thompson, have renewed debate about his mental acuity. The scrutiny also comes after Biden was diagnosed with an aggressive cancer last month. The diagnosis itself prompted questions about whether the timing was intended as a distraction and did little to quell talk about whether the 82-year-old should have dropped out of the race earlier. Republicans, for their part, are largely heralding the inquiries as a pursuit in transparency. 'The American people deserve to know who was making decisions from the White House between 2021-2025. I hope this investigation uncovers the truth,' Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) said on X of Trump's probe. A number of Democrats seen as 2028 hopefuls, asked in recent weeks about the end of Biden's presidency, have acknowledged his weaknesses. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told an Iowa town hall last month that his then-boss's decision to run for reelection 'maybe' hurt Democrats, and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told Politico there's 'no doubt' Biden suffered cognitive decline. Across the board, though, Democrats have been pointing toward the future and hoping to move on from questions about their former party leader as they stare down the high-stakes midterms next year and aim for the White House in 2028. Biden's favorability was at 39 percent in the latest YouGov/The Economist polling, compared to Trump's 44 percent and former Vice President Harris's 42 percent. 'If Democrats shift their focus to this, then they risk further alienating and frustrating their base that is ready to put Biden behind them,' said Democratic strategist Fred Hicks. He pointed out Trump's public fallout this week with Musk, who's suggested that Trump's bill could be 'bankrupting America,' and suggested it could be opening for Democrats in their pushback against the administration. But although Democrats are pushing for the party to ignore not just the probe but the Biden discourse more broadly, many have acknowledged that the issue is likely to dog them through 2028 and could even be a political liability for some potential presidential contenders. Strategist Hank Sheinkopfinterpreted Trump's new probe not as a trap or bait, but as a direct attack, and countered some of his fellow Democrats by arguing that the party ought to respond. ''Take [Trump] on or lose in 2026' is really the reality which they don't want to deal with. They somehow believe that if they don't take them on, they'll win anyway,' Sheinkopf said of party leaders. 'What they want is [to say], 'Biden, we're not talking about that, that's the past.' But that's the present. So it's a delusional argument,' he said. 'Trump is making this the present. He's defining the Demcoratic Party by Biden, and the things he's going to say about Biden, whether they are true or not. So you can't let that stand.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store