Texas will share equipment database with local fire departments to help beat wildfires
LUBBOCK — A bill that establishes a statewide inventory of firefighting equipment won final approval Wednesday. The bill, a response to the historic wildfires that engulfed the Texas Panhandle last year, now heads to Gov. Greg Abbott's desk.
Senate Bill 767, filed by state Sen. Kevin Sparks, R-Midland, creates a database of statewide firefighting equipment that is available during a wildfire. The inventory will include descriptions of the equipment, allow for searches by location and equipment types, and have contact information for fire departments.
The database will be operated by Texas A&M Forest Service, a state agency that manages Texas' forests and natural resources. Sparks previously told a Senate committee that the agency already tracks emergency response equipment at fire stations. The bill makes that information widely accessible to fire departments statewide, including volunteer fire departments, which often operate on shoestring budgets and old equipment in rural areas. The agency would also be required to update the database annually.
'This would allow fire departments to share and locate equipment more effectively during emergencies, improve coordination and planning,' Sparks previously told a Senate committee on the bill.
The bill received unanimous approval in both the Texas House and Senate. The bill also had the support of firefighters and people in emergency services, who testified to lawmakers that fire departments need this service.
Texas lawmakers filed a bevy of bills to address the devastating wildfires that killed three people last year and burned millions of acres in the rural Panhandle. Sparks, along with state Rep. Ken King, R-Canadian, and freshman state Rep. Caroline Fairly, R-Amarillo, all filed legislation suggested in a report by a House committee that investigated the fire. The bills include proposals such as creating a statewide network that would connect all first responders and state agencies, boosting funds to rural volunteer fire departments, and putting oversight on unregulated power lines.
[A year after Texas' largest wildfire, Panhandle residents tugged between hope and anxiety]
Two priority pieces of legislation — House Bill 13, which creates the Interoperability Council, and Senate Bill 34, a comprehensive bill on wildfire preparation and response — were approved by their originating chambers and are now in committee discussions.
The House investigative committee concluded that unmaintained electrical lines for oilfield equipment started at least two of the blazes. The Smokehouse Creek Fire, which grew to be the largest fire in Texas history, was ignited after a decayed power pole snapped and landed in dry grass, the committee found.
The committee also concluded that there are voluntary aid agreements between fire departments near each other, but volunteer fire departments can't easily find and request the equipment they may need. During the wildfires, there was an uncoordinated response between responding agencies and uncertainty about what equipment was available and needed to stop the blaze from spreading.
Tickets are on sale now for the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Get tickets before May 1 and save big! TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
23 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Biden's doctor failed to properly assess fitness for office, Obama's doctor says
The rare criticism of one White House doctor by another comes as Republicans have increased scrutiny of O'Connor and other former White House aides. House Republicans subpoenaed O'Connor on Thursday, a day after President Donald Trump ordered White House attorneys to determine whether Biden's inner circle tried to conceal his alleged cognitive decline. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Kuhlman also said the 2024 report merely assessed Biden's health when it should have considered his fitness to serve in one of the most taxing jobs on the planet. Advertisement 'It shouldn't be just health, it should be fitness,' Kuhlman said. 'Fitness is: Do you have that robust mind, body, spirit that you can do this physically, mentally, emotionally demanding job?' O'Connor did not respond to repeated requests for comment. Biden's recent disclosure of metastatic prostate cancer and reporting about his alleged physical and cognitive decline have fueled suspicion - among Democrats as well as Republicans - that the true state of Biden's health toward the end of his term was known only by O'Connor and a few others closest to Biden. Advertisement Journalists Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson sketched a picture of a well-meaning but weakened president in a book they released last month. The book, which draws on interviews with dozens of Democratic insiders after the 2024 election, paints a portrait of a man suffering at times from forgetfulness, incoherence and fatigue. It also says that O'Connor was reluctant to give Biden a cognitive test, though he was assessed by a neurologist for conditions such as Parkinson's disease. Biden gave a sarcastic response last week. 'You can see that I'm mentally incompetent, and I can't walk, and I can beat the hell out of both of them,' he told reporters at a Memorial Day event, apparently referring to Tapper and Thompson. Biden's granddaughter Naomi Biden has called the book 'political fairy smut.' The book isn't the first time Biden's cognitive state has been questioned. Special counsel Robert K. Hur said in February 2024 that Biden had 'limited precision and recall' - including not remembering when his vice-presidential term ended - after Hur conducted two days of interviews with Biden about his handling of classified documents. Kuhlman formerly worked alongside O'Connor in the White House medical unit, a nonpartisan post, and appointed him in 2009 to serve as then-Vice President Biden's personal doctor. Kuhlman was Obama's physician from 2009 to 2013. O'Connor examined Biden - and signed his name to the February 2024 medical report that said the president 'continues to be fit for duty' - four months before a disastrous campaign debate between Trump and Biden prompted Democrats to call for Biden to step down as the nominee. Advertisement Kuhlman, who left the medical unit in 2013, said he tries not to criticize those who have held similar positions. He called O'Connor 'a good doctor' who seemed to do his best to 'give trusted medical advice.' 'I didn't see that he's purposely hiding stuff, but I don't know that,' he said. 'Maybe the investigation will show it.' Kuhlman wrote a 2024 book about his experiences in the White House Medical Unit in which he argued for cognitive testing for older candidates and presidents. O'Connor's six-page report included Biden's lab results and an explanation of various conditions for which he was being treated. It also listed 10 medical specialists, including a neurologist, who also examined Biden. 'President Biden is a healthy, active, robust 81-year-old male, who remains fit to successfully execute the duties of the presidency,' O'Connor wrote. White House doctors have long been under intense public scrutiny, balancing the deeply personal doctor-patient relationship with a responsibility to tell the American public whether the president is fit to serve - and if not, why. Some have gone to great lengths to hide when the president is severely ill - as Grover Cleveland's doctors did when they turned a yacht into an operating room to secretly remove a tumor from the president's mouth in 1893. Presidential physicians also are expected to communicate to Americans personal information about the very person who could fire them. 'Whether it's family who are worried for them or people who work for them and don't want to lose their jobs, no one has a vested interest in hearing the truth about the president's health - except for the American people and the world,' said Barbara Perry, a presidential historian at the University of Virginia. Advertisement It has not always been clear what role the White House doctors see for themselves. Even as they are often close confidants of the president, they must consider the good of the country in their recommendations about what tests and treatments to pursue. O'Connor repeatedly refused last year to administer a cognitive exam to Biden even as aides privately expressed concerns about his mental fitness, according to Tapper and Thompson's book. Trump's former doctors, including Ronny Jackson and Sean Conley, have at times sounded more like cheerleaders for the president than sober judges of his health. His current doctor, Sean Barbabella, mentioned Trump's 'frequent victories in golf events' in the first medical report of his second term. Jackson suggested to the media in 2018 that Trump had 'incredibly good genes' and joked that he might live to 200 years old if his eating habits were more healthful. Jackson, now a Republican congressman from Texas, was demoted by the U.S. Navy after an inspector general report shed light on multiple misdeeds involving alcohol and harassment while he served in the White House medical unit. Conley, who succeeded Jackson, repeatedly downplayed the severity of Trump's symptoms when he was hospitalized with covid-19 in the fall of 2020. Past presidents who didn't want the public to know the truth about their poor health have orchestrated elaborate cover-ups. After Woodrow Wilson suffered a major stroke in 1919, leaving him with a paralyzed left side, his doctor conspired with Wilson's wife to keep his condition hidden from his own Cabinet. Advertisement Cleveland insisted the operation to remove his tumor be secretly performed on a friend's yacht, under the guise that he was on a fishing trip near his summer home on Long Island. The administration denied an initial report about the surgery, and the truth wasn't widely accepted until after Cleveland's death many years later, when one of his doctors publicly confessed. On the other hand, Dwight D. Eisenhower reportedly ordered his press secretary to 'tell them everything' after suffering a heart attack in 1955. His surgeons regularly briefed the public after his heart surgery. But medical transparency is only as strong as the president wants it to be. Like regular Americans, the president is protected by medical privacy laws, so disclosing any health information is ultimately up to him. An additional challenge, former White House doctors and presidential historians say, is that there is no official requirement for how often a president should undergo an exam, what the exam should include and which of the results should be made public. 'There's nothing codified about what to do,' said Kuhlman, who also served on the White House medical unit under George W. Bush. White House doctors traditionally conduct an annual physical exam on the president and release a memo of varying length that includes vital signs, a summary of the physical examination and the results of blood tests. These memos generally conclude with some kind of pronouncement from the doctor that the president is fit to execute the duties of the presidency. Trump's and Biden's doctors have largely followed that pattern, although the reports on Biden's health have been significantly longer and more detailed than the reports on Trump. Advertisement Kuhlman and Lawrence Mohr, who served as physician to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, said they were never asked by any president to withhold medical information in their reports. Mohr said he recalls that there was 'never any question' about being candid about the president's health. 'You never lie; never, never say anything that's not true,' Mohr said. 'You put out a clear press release about what's going on, what to expect and you get it out there. If you don't do that, you end up with all sorts of speculation.' Reagan was 77 when he left office and five years later announced he had Alzheimer's disease. He faced similar questions about his fitness to serve. Mohr recollected administering the Mini-Mental State Examination - a test used to assess cognitive function - to the 40th president. Trump's doctors have given him a different cognitive test, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. But cognitive tests are not standard practice. Neither George W. Bush nor Obama took one, Kuhlman said. But they were much younger while in office than Biden. 'I was fortunate to have 50-year-old patients instead of 80-year-old ones,' Kuhlman said.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Don't give Dan Patrick his THC ban. Here's a better way for Texas on cannabis
Sometimes, the Texas Legislature creates a mess that only it can fix. And unfortunately, the clean-up is often a mess of its own. So it is with a bill that would ban products that contain THC, the psychoactive ingredient in cannabis. It's an attempt to right a loophole in the 2019 state law that allowed a Texas hemp industry to develop. But the medicine is simply too strong. Gov. Greg Abbott should veto the bill and give the Legislature the chance to try again with precise, thoughtful regulation. How did we get here, with lawmakers wanting to dismantle something they essentially created a few years ago? In 2019, Texas needed a law to comply with new federal statutes on hemp, the non-intoxicating version of the cannabis plant. Legislators charged ahead, missing the distinctions among the chemicals that can provide a high. They also failed to ask enough questions about testing, including whether police labs had the capacity to determine the level of THC in a product and thus the difference between hemp (legal) and marijuana (still illegal). Still, a business opportunity was born, and Texas, as our leaders like to say, is open for business. Responsible retail shops boomed, but so did unscrupulous producers who offered wares that enticed children and didn't distinguish between a professional who would demand ID or a convenience store where somnolent clerks wouldn't even notice who was buying gummies and the like. Enter Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. Before some lawmakers could even settle in their offices, he declared that a complete ban on products containing THC was the only option. He suggested that he would not negotiate and that if he didn't get his way, he would melt down the whole legislative session. He never said exactly how, but Patrick, who controls all the levers in the Texas Senate, could have held back one of Abbott's priorities, such as school vouchers, or even prevent passage of the state budget, which would leave no option but a special session. Patrick was never willing to entertain the obvious solution: more precise regulation with more robust enforcement. Texas could allow for the sale of low-level THC products without embracing a full-blown marijuana culture. The experience of legalization in other states has been fraught with problems. There's increasing concern that today's much stronger, much more available marijuana is incapacitating too many people — as well as creating alarm about possible unknown long-term health consequences. Licensed dealers can sell well-tested products in packaging that's unappealing to children. The state could bar corner gas stations or other generalized stores and businesses within walking distance of schools from dealing in THC products. It could create an agency to regulate them, funded through a tax on the products, or create such a function within an existing state entity. In other words, it could treat the substance similar to the way it treats alcohol. We all know that even with a regime of rules and enforcement, teenagers sometimes drink. A few, tragically, even die as a result. Few people would say that's sufficient reason to ban beer and wine. Heck, they are venerated Texas industries. Patrick gave away the game when, late in the session, he declared that cannabis producers and retailers 'want to kill your kids, and they don't give a damn.' It's the kind of pompous, self-righteous rhetoric that Patrick frequently uses to substitute for actual debate. And if someone else made similar remarks about, say, the gun industry, Patrick would be the first to get in front of a Fox News camera and decry it. The lieutenant governor declared it 'stupid' to even raise the comparison to alcohol — though, to be fair, few are more familiar with stupid rhetoric than Patrick. Patrick did eventually agree to expanding the availability of medical marijuana under the state's Compassionate Use Program. If Abbott signs that bill — and he should — conditions such as traumatic brain injuries and chronic pain would be among those added to the list that qualifies a Texan to purchase THC products. The state would add more dispensaries, too. In other words, through specific, careful regulation, Texas is steadily finding ways to get needed relief to those who can find it nowhere else. Someone alert Patrick: It can be done! We love to hear from Texans with opinions on the news — and to publish those views in the Opinion section. • Letters should be no more than 150 words. • Writers should submit letters only once every 30 days. • Include your name, address (including city of residence), phone number and email address, so we can contact you if we have questions. You can submit a letter to the editor two ways: • Email letters@ (preferred). • Fill out this online form. Please note: Letters will be edited for style and clarity. Publication is not guaranteed. The best letters are focused on one topic.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Idaho senators should protect school choice in ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' is now moving through the U.S. Senate, and conservative Christians are thrilled with many of the provisions that have been included so far. Although we don't yet know how the Senate version of the bill will shake out, it's worth noting that the version passed by the House late last month fulfills many of the pro-family policies made by the Trump administration. These include an expansion to the child tax credit for working families, tax benefits for adoptive parents and making permanent the Trump personal income and business tax cuts that fueled the above-average economic growth America experienced before the pandemic derailed international markets. However, one provision in particular that would improve educational access and outcomes for all students has flown under the radar so far. The provision would help more than one million students across the country access the educational support they need by creating special tax benefits for private donations to scholarship-granting organizations. It is modeled after the Educational Choice for Children Act, a federal proposal that has been introduced multiple times over the past several years and has earned the support of Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, as well as other conservative stalwarts like Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, and Sen. Tim Scott, R-South Carolina. Scholarship-granting organizations already exist in many states, providing scholarships directly to students for tuition, tutoring, special needs services, education technology and curriculum materials. The provision offers both a supplement and alternative for students in states like Idaho, which has already begun moving down the road to more universal school choice programs by offering a new $5,000 refundable tax credit paid directly to the private school and homeschool families. Some parents — particularly within the homeschooling community — have voiced concerns that new school choice initiatives, such as Idaho's refundable tax credit, might jeopardize their educational freedom. After all, government money usually comes with strings attached. When you take the government cheese, you have to step into the regulatory mousetrap. And even if those restrictions aren't imposed right away, the door remains open for future state and federal mandates. Importantly, the ECCA provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill addresses these concerns by making sure no government funds go to the organizations, schools, or families involved — thereby avoiding another opportunity for government regulation. Instead, the ECCA establishes tax incentives for private donations to scholarship-granting organizations, which then award scholarships directly to students. Because this is private money — not government dollars — families can freely choose the best educational options for their children without government interference. All of this explains why the ECCA is supported by homeschool freedom advocates, including the Home School Legal Defense Association. In fact, the ECCA model helps ensure that parents remain in control of their children's education, consistent with biblical principles like Ephesians 6:4, which commands fathers to bring up their children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. Not only would the ECCA provision in the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' help parents fulfill this biblical responsibility, but it would also expand educational opportunities for children currently stuck in failing public schools, no matter the state in which they live. Nationwide school choice which empowers parents while also protecting educational freedom is a high priority for Trump — and it should be just as high a priority for our legislative branch as they set education policy. With that in mind, we call on the U.S. Senate to keep the ECCA provision in whichever version of the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' they adopt. Our children — and their families — deserve it. Blaine Conzatti is the president of Idaho Family Policy Center.
