West Texas lawmakers push bills to divert some oil and gas taxes to help oil-producing counties with roads, other needs
More heavy trucks drove through small towns, tearing up roads. Companies built temporary workforce housing, called man camps, which local officials said dramatically increased the population, requiring more public services like garbage pick-up, hospital beds and first responders.
Local leaders say the oil boom has caused strains that their city and county budgets can't keep up with.
Two West Texas lawmakers want to divert 10% of the roughly $8 billion that oil and gas companies pay the state in so-called severance taxes to benefit oil-producing counties. Legislation sponsored by State Reps. Tom Craddick of Midland and Brooks Landgraf of Odessa would redirect a portion of those taxes to 32 eligible counties to be used for infrastructure repairs, emergency services, health care, education and workforce development.
Regulators, industry and environmental policy experts agree that addressing the damage caused by decades of oil and gas production will require significant policy and funding changes.
A report by the House Appropriations Committee on House Bill 2154, which Craddick and Landgraf authored together in 2019 to address the same issues, said that failing to help communities in the oil patch repair their infrastructure could also impede the oil and gas industry.
'In recent years, the regions of Texas responsible for the growth in the state's oil and natural gas production have encountered significant challenges that have limited the potential growth of the energy sector and could pose a significant threat to the sustained future growth of oil and natural gas production in the state,' the report said.
Their 2019 bill died in the Senate. And in 2021 and 2023, they tried and failed again.
This time, they introduced two separate proposals. Craddick authored House Bill 265, which is basically identical to the 2019 bill. Landgraf introduced House Bill 188, which would also devote money to oil field cleanup and emissions reduction programs managed by the Texas Railroad Commission and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality — and give property tax relief to homeowners statewide.
Landgraf could not say whether the changes will be enough to finally win support in the upper chamber.
'It's a high barrier. I've known that since 2018 when I first started looking into this,' Landgraf said. 'But I do think that if it's a policy that we can put in place, it would have great dividends for every corner of Texas, and that's why I think it's a fight that's still worth fighting.'
The two bills would redirect some oil and gas tax money to certain oil and gas-producing counties, as well as coastal counties where a port authority transports oil and gas. Landgraf's bill would set aside $500 million, while Craddick's would collect up to $250 million for all eligible counties.
Under Landgraf's bill, county governments, school districts, colleges and nonprofits in qualifying counties could apply for the money and spend it on things like road repairs, improving schools, workforce development initiatives and emergency services.
The remaining $300 million would go toward the Property Tax Relief Fund, an account managed by the state comptroller used to reduce maintenance repairs in school districts, which are funded by local property taxes.
If one or both of the bills can get through the Legislature and get Gov. Greg Abbott's approval, they would still need to go before Texas voters this fall as a constitutional amendment.
Budget writers in both chambers typically don't like being told how to spend money through constitutional amendments, said Sherri Greenberg, a dean of state and local government engagement at the University of Texas at Austin.
The intense pace of oil production in the Permian Basin, which covers 75,000 square miles between Texas and New Mexico, has also inflicted environmental damage.
The Texas Railroad Commission, the state agency that regulates the state's oil and gas industry, has said it cannot afford to keep up with the increasing cost of plugging thousands of so-called orphan oil and gas wells, which have no clear owner or were drilled by now-bankrupt companies.
Recently, a number of these wells have unexpectedly erupted with toxic wastewater that apparently migrated from oilfield disposal wells.
Under Landgraf's bill, 1% of the diverted money would go to the Railroad Commission to help plug orphan wells. An additional 1% would pay for emissions reduction efforts in trucking, farming and construction overseen by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
Oil companies, trade groups and environmentalist policy experts have testified in favor of both bills.
Cyrus Reed, a legislative and conservation director for the Sierra Club, which advocates for policies that strengthen environmental protections nationally, said he supports Landgraf's bill for its environmental propositions.
'We're going to support any solution that gets more revenue paid by the oil and gas industry to resolve (environmental) issues,' Reed said. 'We don't want to rely on … just general revenue from the people of Texas to pay for a problem that industry created.'
Landgraf hopes that expanding the legislation so it has an impact beyond energy-producing regions of Texas will help it gain more support in the Legislature.
'My position is that what's good for the Permian Basin is good for all of Texas,' he said 'But sometimes that takes a bit more of a holistic or longer view for people not from the Permian Basin to reach that conclusion.'
Disclosure: The University of Texas at Austin has been a financial supporter 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.
We can't wait to welcome you to the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Step inside the conversations shaping the future of education, the economy, health care, energy, technology, public safety, culture, the arts and so much more.
Hear from our CEO, Sonal Shah, on TribFest 2025.
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
27 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Prominent national Democrats ask Josh Kraft to stop using names, likenesses in unauthorized fundraising push
And, it turns out, Schiff never said Kraft could reach out with that urgent message. The Kraft Schiff's name and likeness is one of at least five the campaign has sent in recent weeks that feature prominent national Democrats who have not publicly weighed in on the Boston mayor's race. At least two of those politicians have now asked the Kraft campaign to stop using their names and likenesses in the email fundraising solicitations. 'Immediately after being informed that the Kraft campaign sent an email we did not approve of in Schiff's name, we reached out to the campaign to ask them to stop,' said a spokesperson for the Schiff campaign. 'While an unfortunate situation, the Kraft campaign let us know that it would not happen again.' Advertisement In addition to Schiff, Kraft fundraising emails featured US Representative Eric Swalwell of California; US Representative Jasmine Crockett of Texas; former North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper, who is running for US Senate; and Shawn Harris, a retired brigadier general and political candidate in Georgia. Swalwell's campaign said he also did not approve the fundraising solicitation, and is asking Kraft to put an end to it. Crockett, Cooper, and Harris did not return requests for comment from the Globe on Monday, but none appears to have publicly waded into the Boston mayor's race. Advertisement The emails sent by the Kraft campaign urged potential donors to financially support both Kraft and the highlighted politician in whose name the email was sent. So-called split list fundraising is not uncommon in Democratic politics; allied politicians often urge their donors to back like minded candidates in an effort to increase their ranks and forge connections. Typically, those fundraising solicitations come from politicians who have explicitly endorsed one another, or at least signed off on the shared fundraising push. It would be highly unusual, if not unheard of, for a political candidate to send such an email in a contested election if she had not already endorsed one of the candidates, political operatives said. Related : For example, in the last month alone, Mayor Michelle Wu's campaign has sent email blasts from US Senators Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren, as well as US Representative Ayanna Pressley. All three are vocal supporters of the mayor, and the emails sent in their name directed donors to give exclusively to Wu. Political and campaign finance experts called the Kraft campaign's recent fundraising blitz unorthodox, or even potentially misleading for donors, while Wu, whom Kraft is seeking to unseat, argued it could be illegal. In a letter on Sunday, Wu campaign treasurer Robert Binney called on the state Office of Campaign and Political Finance to investigate. Advertisement 'Even assuming a donor managed to decipher the fine print, these voters would reasonably assume that leading national figures like Senator Schiff and Representative Crockett are supporting Kraft's campaign for Mayor, which we believe to be untrue and an obvious attempt to deceive voters,' Binney wrote. 'At best these practices are highly deceptive and negligent, at worst they are illegal violations of our state campaign finance laws.' A spokesperson for the Kraft campaign defended the legality of the fundraising push, and said the unauthorized emails were 'an error on the part of our vendor.' 'Our vendor is responsible for the approvals process with all candidates involved. As a result of today's inquiries, we have been made aware that what we thought was an isolated incident in failing to seek approval was much larger,' said the spokesperson, Eileen O'Connor. 'As a result, we are moving to shut down the links and terminate our agreement with the consulting firm.' The OCPF complaint from Wu's campaign is 'lacking on both substantive and legal grounds,' O'Connor added. 'Michelle Wu is desperate to distract voters from her broken campaign promises and failures on so many pressing issues.' Related : The Kraft campaign has also The email featuring Schiff was sent on July 20. When Schiff's team reached out the next day, they were quickly told it would not happen again. But more than a week later, on Aug. 2, Kraft's campaign sent an email that appeared to come from Swalwell, another well known California Democrat. Advertisement 'As the senior-most Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, I've seen a lot,' the email begins, before railing against a Trump appointee and the actions of the administration. 'Chip in today,' the email urged, linking to an Swalwell also did not approve of the email sent in his voice, a spokesperson told the Globe Monday. 'We were not aware that they did this. We did not approve, nor would we have,' said Lisa Tucker, a spokesperson for Swalwell's campaign. Tucker said Swalwell's team had reached out to the Kraft campaign to ask that the joint Act Blue link be shut down. Tucker said Swalwell has offered a 'partner toolkit' for a year and a half 'and have never had something like this happen.' Typically, allied candidates who want to fundraise alongside him would seek permission directly, and the Swalwell campaign would approve of any fundraising emails before they are sent, she said. 'This is definitely making us reexamine our process to make sure this doesn't happen again,' Tucker said. Other emails featuring prominent national Democrats were sent on July 30 and Aug. 1, according to screenshots obtained by the Globe. Kraft is seen as Wu's closest rival in the mayor's race this year, though a recent Suffolk University/ Boston Globe poll Advertisement So far, Kraft has been a strong fundraiser. As of the end of June, Related : The fundraising emails raise serious questions about the Kraft campaign's tactics, said Jack Corrigan, a campaign finance lawyer and longtime Democratic operative who has donated to Wu this campaign cycle but does not work for her campaign. The emails — at least some of which were sent without permission of the high profile Democrats — imply an endorsement, and for donors, that could be 'deceptive,' Corrigan said. 'Even if it's legal,' he said, 'it's questionable.' Tal Kopan of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Emma Platoff can be reached at
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
August recess can't hide tensions ahead for Congress on spending and Trump nominations
WASHINGTON — Lawmakers have left Washington for the annual August recess, but a few weeks of relative quiet on the U.S. Capitol grounds can't mask the partisan tensions that are brewing on government funding and President Trump's nominees. It could make for a momentous September. Here's a look at what's ahead when lawmakers return after the Labor Day holiday. Lawmakers will use much of September to work on spending bills for the coming budget year, which begins Oct. 1. They likely will need to pass a short-term spending measure to keep the government funded for a few weeks while they work on a longer-term measure that covers the full year. It's not unusual for leaders from both parties to blame the other party for a potential shutdown, but the rhetoric began extra early this year, signaling the threat of a stoppage is more serious than usual. On Monday, Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries sent their Republican counterparts a sharply-worded letter calling for a meeting to discuss 'the government funding deadline and the health care crisis you have visited upon the American people.' They said it will take bipartisanship to avert a 'painful, unnecessary shutdown.' 'Yet it is clear that the Trump Administration and many in your party are preparing to go it alone and continue to legislate on a solely Republican basis,' said the letter sent to Senate Majority Leader John Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson. Republicans have taken note of the warnings and are portraying the Democrats as itching for a shutdown they hope to blame on the GOP. 'It was disturbing to hear the Democrat leader threaten to shut down the government in his July 8 Dear Colleague letter,' Thune said on Saturday. '... I really hope that Democrats will not embrace that position but will continue to work with Republicans to fund the government.' So far, the House has approved two of the 12 annual spending bills, mostly along party lines. The Senate has passed three on a strongly bipartisan basis. The House is pursuing steep, non-defense spending cuts. The Senate is rejecting many of those cuts. One side will have to give. And any final bill will need some Democratic support to generate the 60 votes necessary to get a spending measure to the finish line. Some Democratic senators are also wanting assurances from Republicans that there won't be more efforts in the coming weeks to claw back or cancel funding already approved by Congress. 'If Republicans want to make a deal, then let's make a deal, but only if Republicans include an agreement they won't take back that deal a few weeks later,' said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. Rep. Chuck Fleischmann, R-Tenn., a veteran member of the House Appropriations committee, said the Democratic minority in both chambers has suffered so many legislative losses this year, 'that they are stuck between a rock and their voting base.' Democrats may want to demonstrate more resistance to Trump, but they would rue a shutdown, he warned. 'The reality would be, if the government were shut down, the administration, Donald Trump, would have the ability to decide where to spend and not spend,' Fleischmann said. 'Schumer knows that, Jeffries knows that. We know that. I think it would be much more productive if we start talking about a short-term (continuing resolution.)' Republicans are considering changes to Senate rules to get more of Trump's nominees confirmed. Thune said last week that during the same point in Joe Biden's presidency, 49 of his 121 civilian nominees had been confirmed on an expedited basis through a voice vote or a unanimous consent request. Trump has had none of his civilian nominees confirmed on an expedited basis. Democrats have insisted on roll call votes for all of them, a lengthy process than can take days. 'I think they're desperately in need of change,' Thune said of Senate rules for considering nominees. 'I think that the last six months have demonstrated that this process, nominations, is broken. And so I expect there will be some good robust conversations about that.' Schumer said a rules change would be a 'huge mistake,' especially as Senate Republicans will need Democratic votes to pass spending bills and other legislation moving forward. The Senate held a rare weekend session as Republicans worked to get more of Trump's nominees confirmed. Negotiations focused on advancing dozens of additional Trump nominees in exchange for some concessions on releasing some already approved spending. At times, lawmakers spoke of progress on a potential deal. But it was clear that there would be no agreement when Trump attacked Schumer on social media Saturday evening and told Republicans to pack it up and go home. 'Tell Schumer, who is under tremendous political pressure from within his own party, the Radical Left Lunatics, to GO TO HELL!' Trump posted on Truth Social. Freking writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
New Hampshire becomes first Northeastern state to ban gender-affirming care for minors
New Hampshire is the first Northeastern state to ban gender-affirming health care for minors after its Republican governor gave final approval to bills that will ban the use of certain prescription medications and surgeries to treat gender dysphoria beginning next year. Gov. Kelly Ayotte, a former U.S. senator who won New Hampshire's gubernatorial election in November, signed two bills Friday restricting access to transition-related care in the state, which already prohibits rare genital surgeries for minors to transition. House Bill 377 prohibits doctors from administering puberty blockers and hormones to transgender youth starting Jan. 1. Like a handful of other, similar measures adopted by nearly all Republican-led states, New Hampshire's prohibition includes a 'grandfather clause' that allows minors already receiving care to continue doing so even after the law goes into effect. The second bill, House Bill 712, builds on New Hampshire's existing restrictions on gender-affirming surgery. The measure, which will also take effect in January, bars adolescents younger than 18 from undergoing certain procedures when they are used to treat gender dysphoria, including facial feminization or masculinization surgery and 'transgender chest surgery.' In a statement, Ayotte said, 'Medical decisions made at a young age can carry lifelong consequences, and these bills represent a balanced, bipartisan effort to protect children.' The New Hampshire House approved HB 377 in June, with two Democrats, state Reps. Dale Girard and Jonah Wheeler, voting with nearly all Republicans to advance the measure. Eleven Democrats were excused from voting. New Hampshire senators approved the bill in a 16-8 party-line vote. Wheeler joined House Republicans again in voting to pass HB 712, and 11 Democrats again were excused. The state Senate approved the measure in June in another vote along party lines. New Hampshire state Rep. Lisa Mazur, a Republican and the prime sponsor of both bills, celebrated their approval Friday in a post on X. 'My two bills that will protect NH kids from irreversible harm were just signed into law by Gov. Ayotte. We are now the 1st state in New England the whole Northeast to do so. Go NH!!' Mazur wrote. In June, while defending House Bill 377, Mazur pointed to a recent Supreme Court ruling that upheld Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors. 'It is now legal and constitutional for states to regulate and or ban the use of these harmful drugs in minors,' she said. LGBTQ rights groups immediately condemned Ayotte's signature on the bills, which they said ignore testimony from transgender youth who have benefited from gender-affirming care and statements from major medical organizations that such care for transgender adults and minors is medically necessary and can be lifesaving. 'It is heartbreaking to witness lawmakers inserting themselves into deeply personal, private conversations between families, their doctors, and their children,' Julia Hawthorne, a board member of the state LGBTQ rights group 603 Equality, wrote on Facebook. Linds Jakows, the organization's founder, said transgender young people in New Hampshire 'are not only tangibly losing access to life-saving healthcare — but also receiving a disturbing message of rejection from their state government.' 'To youth impacted by these bills, please know: You are loved, you are worthy of respect and dignity, and there is a community here in New Hampshire and beyond that is ready to support you,' they said. The Campaign for Southern Equality, an LGBTQ rights group that has since 2023 distributed more than $900,000 in grants to families of transgender children needing to travel out-of-state for gender-affirming care, announced on Friday that it would expand its Trans Youth Emergency Project into New Hampshire. 'Every day I speak with families of transgender youth who are worried about the future. Many are panicking, unsure of where or when they'll get the medicine that their child needs to continue leading a healthy, happy life,' said Van Bailey, a patient navigator for the program. 'These laws are cruelly thrusting families into impossible choices, and it is deeply unfair.'
