Texas Lawmakers Will Debate Flood Response, Redistricting and Other Issues
Lawmakers will also take up questions about the handling of the devastating July 4 floods, which killed more than 130 people, including at least 37 children. Nearly 100 Texans remain missing.
But that bipartisan imperative will be complicated by a hard-edge partisan agenda for the session, dominated by President Trump's push for the Legislature to redraw the state's congressional district maps to be more favorable for Republicans. He wants his party to gain five seats in Texas in the 2026 midterm elections to help retain control of the U.S. House.
Gov. Greg Abbott has asked lawmakers to also consider a dozen other items during the 30-day special session, including new hard-line conservative proposals to ban mail-order abortion pills, lower property taxes and regulate intoxicating hemp. And he wants lawmakers to consider a state constitutional amendment that would empower the state attorney general to prosecute election crimes.
'It's a wild situation,' said State Representative Jon Rosenthal, a Houston-area Democrat. 'The past sessions I've been a part of have been of a very limited scope.'
Most Texans' attention will probably lie with the July 4 flood and what can be done to improve warning systems, such as placing outdoor sirens along flood-prone waterways like the Guadalupe River, where most of the deaths occurred.
Image
The special session of the Texas State Legislature that is scheduled to convene on July 21 will be 'a wild situation,' said State Representative Jon Rosenthal, Democrat of Houston.
Credit...
Elizabeth Conley/Houston Chronicle, via Getty Images
'That's the most obvious thing that can be done,' said Sid Miller, the state's Republican agriculture commissioner.
The redistricting fight, though, will have national implications and headline-grabbing potential. Democrats in the Legislature are considering walking out to try to thwart the effort by denying Republicans a quorum.
Redistricting is 'an inside-baseball thing,' Mr. Miller said, noting that while he supported Republican efforts to win more seats, 'most Texans are not too concerned about that.'
That dismissive shrug is probably not how it will play out more widely.
'Democrats must keep all options on the table,' said State Representative John Bucy III, an Austin-area Democrat gearing up for a fight on the issue.
As recently as a few weeks ago, many people in Austin felt that a special session this year was unlikely. During the regular legislative session, the governor had finally accomplished his signature agenda item, a publicly funded private-school voucher program — an achievement that had eluded his Republican predecessors, George W. Bush and Rick Perry.
But Mr. Abbott had unfinished business driving him toward an extra session. Then came orders from Washington: The president wanted Texas lawmakers to redraw the state's congressional map, because of worries about the slim Republican House majority surviving the midterm elections, which almost always favor the party out of power.
And then the floods hit the Hill Country. Last week, just before Mr. Trump visited the flood-damaged area, Mr. Abbott added flood response legislation to the special session agenda, along with redistricting.
Image
President Trump spoke alongside Governor Abbott at a meeting with emergency response personnel and local officials in Kerrville, Texas.
Credit...
Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times
It remained unclear in what order the State Legislature would take up the two high-profile issues. Some lobbyists and legislative aides suggested that redistricting appeared likely to be handled first, because Democrats might be less likely to stage a walkout to stop the map-drawing effort if it meant blocking action on flooding as well.
But going forward with a partisan redistricting plan before taking any steps to address one of the state's worst natural disasters in generations could present political problems for Republicans, who control all levels of state government.
'The one thing that is mandatory is the flood — that's essential,' said Bill Miller, a veteran Austin lobbyist and longtime Texas political observer. 'If they don't do that, it will hurt them politically. And you'd better do it first.'
Flood Response
Mr. Abbott listed four matters related to flooding that he called on lawmakers to consider in the session: improvements to warning systems, relief funding for counties hit by the July floods, better emergency communications and cutting regulations surrounding disaster preparation and recovery.
'We must ensure better preparation for such events in the future,' Mr. Abbott said.
Lawmakers are expected to hold at least two public hearings on the flooding, on July 23 at the Capitol in Austin and then on July 31 in Kerrville, Texas, the epicenter of the flooding in the Hill Country.
'With only 30 days to act, we must make every moment count,' the speaker of the Texas House, Dustin Burrows, said in a statement announcing the creation of a select committee on disaster preparedness and flooding.
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who leads the State Senate, has called for the construction of sirens along the Guadalupe River.
Image
More than 130 people were killed in flash flooding in Central Texas earlier this month.
Credit...
Jordan Vonderhaar for The New York Times
But he also suggested that some of the issues raised by the flooding, like previous government inaction on warning systems, may not be addressed in the special session. He promised that officials would gather the facts and answer the many questions raised after the flooding 'in the coming year, and into the next regular legislative session' in 2027.
U.S. House Redistricting
Few Republican lawmakers, in Austin and in Washington, have expressed enthusiasm for Mr. Trump's aggressive redistricting demand.
'I think we'll get five,' Mr. Trump said on Tuesday when asked how many seats he hoped Republicans would gain from the effort.
Texas has 38 congressional districts, with 25 currently held by Republicans and 12 held by Democrats. One seat, representing a heavily Democratic district in Houston, is vacant; it will be filled in a special election in November.
Maps are supposed to be redrawn around the beginning of each decade, using data from the latest census, which reapportions House seats among the states based on population changes. Mid-decade redistricting is rare, and almost always contentious.
The Trump administration has argued that several districts in Houston and Dallas that are held by Black and Hispanic Democrats are 'unconstitutional racial gerrymanders' and need to be redrawn. That is a charge that Texas Republicans have long rejected when their maps have been challenged by Democrats and minority groups.
In addition, Republicans have been looking at their recent growth in support among Hispanic voters, particularly in the Rio Grande Valley, as an avenue for drawing new district maps that would favor their candidates.
Image
A long list of agenda items awaits the Texas Legislature when it convenes for the special session.
Credit...
Jordan Vonderhaar for The New York Times
Democrats have been strategizing about how to respond, including the question of whether to walk out of the special session to prevent a quorum. To do that in the 150-member Texas House, 51 of the 62 Democrats would have to join in.
A walkout could come at a heavy cost for the participants. After the tactic was used in 2021, Texas Republicans have tried to deter future walkouts by adopting rules in the State House that include $500-a-day fines for each lawmaker who stays away.
Beyond Texas, Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, a Democrat, is threatening to have his state's House district lines redrawn to favor his party if Texas Republicans succeed in redrawing theirs. (For now, that might be bluster, since California's laws and state constitution make such a move a much taller order than it is in Texas.)
The clock is working against Republicans. The Dec. 8 deadline for filing to get on the March 2026 primary ballot is fast approaching, and any new maps adopted during the special session would probably be challenged in court. That could complicate whether they would take effect in time for the midterm elections in 2026.
The Governor's Other Desires
Mr. Abbott put a long list of other items in his call for the special session, most of them measures that failed to become law during the regular session.
The most contentious of them is a bill to regulate the industry that produces intoxicating hemp products like gummies, drinks and other consumable items that deliver a high similar to that from marijuana.
Mr. Patrick, the state's powerful lieutenant governor, muscled a total ban on such products through the Legislature late in the regular session, only to see Mr. Abbott veto the measure. The governor said that lawmakers should consider regulating the products instead of banning them, and should make it a crime to sell hemp intoxicants to people under the age of 21. Currently there are no age restrictions on the products in Texas.
Image
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick defending the THC ban at news conference in May.
Credit...
Ilana Panich-Linsman for The New York Times
Mr. Abbott also wants the Legislature to take up measures favored by activist Republicans, including a proposed ban on local governments hiring lobbyists to advocate for their interests at the State Capitol; a bill to give the state attorney general new powers to prosecute violations of election law; and new legislation restricting abortion, in a state that already has a near-total ban.
Anti-abortion activists urged lawmakers to pass a bill that would try to stop mail-order abortion pills from being used in Texas.
'They only have 30 days to do it,' said John Seago, the president of Texas Right to Life.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Pfizer CEO shares 3 pillars of company's cost-cutting efforts
Pfizer (PFE) topped second quarter expectations, but looming Trump-era pharmaceutical tariffs remain a concern. Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla joins Market Domination to discuss the company's earnings results and cost-cutting efforts. He also notes that a manufacturing shift would require a grace period due to long timelines. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination. Pfizer reporting a beat on revenue and earnings for its second quarter. But the pharmaceutical manufacturer is facing new hurdles with tariff threats and calls from President Trump to lower prices. Our own, Julie Hyman, and senior health reporter, Anjalee Khemlani, spoke with the CEO about cost-cutting efforts and the future of the firm. I would call it more its productivity enhancement and margin expansion. We do that by implementing three things. One, it is focus. So we stop doing things that they are not that important, and we double down on things that they are. The second is technology. Technology right now offers tremendous opportunities for improvement of productivity, particularly AI and simplification of our business process. There is a lot of waste that is happening when you have complicated structures that require usually more people than if you have streamlined your areas. And this is where we are. We have announced a program that we are on track to exceed actually this year. And then announced an additional 1.7 billions of cost reductions, 1.2 billions of that until '27 will happen in SGNA in administrative and marketing and selling expenses. And that will fall to the bottom line. 500 millions will happen in R&D, and that will be reinvested all back in R&D. So it's not just the cost-cutting though, obviously, investors also want to see growth on the top line, growth in revenues. You guys did have growth in revenues this quarter by 10%. And the revenue growth has been more volatile. So how do you keep that momentum going and also find stability? Yes. If you see the elements of our revenues, the volatile piece is mainly our COVID. Because COVID could happen in different quarters every year. Usually there are two waves every year and in sometimes like 23, one way, the summer or the winter are stronger. And the same as in 24. So it's a different year by year. So I think that's the variability. The rest of the business, it's a very strong, continuous growth momentum, I think, and new products and recently acquired products contributed 4.7 billion dollars in this first half of the year. And they are growing at 15%. So it's very solid. I do want to talk about the backdrop from Washington. Because that's something that involves, that affects not just you, but the whole industry. You're also currently the head of the Pharmaceutical Industry Association. You did say on the call that you have a special relationship with members of this administration. Of course, we've heard the president be critical of the industry. What do you feel you have been able to educate President Trump about to sort of better help him understand the industry's perspective? I said we have a special relation with the president because that relation was cemented during the COVID crisis. He was very concerned. He want to make sure that we speed up the development of vaccines. So we speak every second week. So he was very active and he would ask about studies and where we are, and what can we do to accelerate. So it was very, it was a bonding, let's say, exercise. No, I, I think he's educated. Of course, it doesn't go into the details, is not his job, but he understands the dynamics. I had multiple times the opportunity to discuss with him the impact that the middleman has in the prices in the US. And he understands this very well and he speaks very vocally about it. Other things that they are subsidizing, that they are taking out of the prices of pharma, so that the patient pays a lot, but then we don't collect all of that because it goes to other areas like 340B. So he, what he wants to achieve, it is to have a better deal. He's very competitive. He doesn't like that others paying less. And he wants to fix it and we are very productively discuss, productively discussing right now what we can do on that. And the president did say in an interview today that tariffs could eventually reach 250%. He's talking about a phase in of that. Are you confident that you'll avoid that outcome for the industry, that 250% on imports of pharmaceuticals? I don't want to speak for the president, but what he said today, which was very important also was that it will be a very small tariff in the first couple of years. And then he opened actually the window for a grace period. Because I had this discussion with him and I had this discussion with multiple other members of the administration, but a manufacturing site to be completed, it takes more than five years for our industry. We in North Carolina, we just completed, not just, but we completed recently a few years back, the build of one manufacturing site. But was one product only, and it took us four and a half years and that was our record. So you can't just say you need to do it immediately and pay tariffs until you transfer. We can't afford to pay tariffs and the investments to transfer. Right. Makes sense. I want to bring in our Anjalee Khemlani, who, of course, you also know, our senior health reporter to talk more about some of these issues. So Anj, I know you're also, of course, watching the pricing debate very closely. Yeah, that most favored nations clause. Albert, I love the letter. Got your special, you know, name crossed out on there from Trump. But going to the contents of it, I know you've already talked about the DTC push and getting that direct to consumer push. You've already unfolded a strategy there, so you're really ahead of the curve there. But I want to actually talk about the pricing part of it because we've had notes from analysts talking about how it's really unfeasible to do most favored nations pricing the way that it's laid out in that letter. Can you talk to us about how you're planning for that? We are planning for all different scenarios of different ways of implementing something like that. And we are discussing and making mitigation plans. But we don't know how that will end up. We are still discussing it with with the president, how and what will be the devil could be on the details in this case. And talking about the tariffs as well. I know that with the manufacturing push, the industry had been trying to really pull the president away from these tariffs and conversations around it with the more than $200 billion in investments. Explain to us how that works considering that 90% of prescription drugs are generics and those are the ones that are cheaper to make, come from overseas, have smaller margins. Therefore, not really appealing to companies like you to produce. Meanwhile, the branded drugs are mostly produced here with the API is coming from overseas. So can you just put it together for us on how it would really impact you with tariffs coming in? What components? Depends on the product and depends how the custom authorities define a country of origin. First of all, you are right that generics are more than nine prescriptions per 10 in the US. And those are the cheapest medicines anywhere in the world. The generic prices in the US are the cheapest of any medicine. I think again, patients are paying way more than the real price of the generics, because of ways that the insurance system and the benefits work. But even with that, they are the cheapest generics in the world. Then the 10% or less that they are, they're branded. Many of them are manufactured here, as you know, probably. We have 13 sites in the US of manufacturing. 11 are manufacturing plants and then two are gigantic warehouses, almost like a plant. So we do a lot of them here, but we over the years, we produce some stuff outside. And Ireland is a typical example, Switzerland is a typical example, other places are typical examples. And those we need to understand if they will be the API will dictate the country of origin or where the final product is made.
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
More people disapprove of Trump than less in latest polls for California, US
Recent efforts by the Trump administration are shaping the future of California, from the effects of the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' on residents to how federal immigration enforcement policies could impact the state's economy. In July, California saw federal officials visit Alcatraz as part of President Donald Trump's interest in reopening the prison. More recently, efforts to redistrict Texas in favor of Republicans — championed by the president, as USA TODAY reported — have Gov. Gavin Newsom looking to countermaneuver it through California's maps. At the state level, Attorney General Rob Bonta said he's filed 37 lawsuits against the Trump administration, some of which pertain to education, public health, and FEMA-related funding. At the local level, numerous Californians attended one of dozens of local demonstrations held in mid-July to protest the Trump administration. Of course, not all Californians and state officials perceive Trump and his administration negatively. But based on two recent polls, the president's favorability can certainly improve in the blue states. In California, the president holds a net approval rating of -31.6 percentage points, according to The Economist. A Civiqs poll found that in California, 29% approve of Trump, 68% disapprove, and 3% neither approve nor disapprove as of Monday, Aug. 4. Back in late May, a Public Policy Institute of California survey found that 70% of Californians disapproved of Trump's handling of his job, just a single percentage point increase from a February survey. Here are several other recent polls to get a wider view of how people view the president's job performance. Trump approval rating: Gallup, New York Times and more The Economist/YouGov poll: 40% approve of Trump, 55% disapprove of Trump and 4% are not sure, according to figures retrieved on Tuesday, Aug. 5. Emerson College poll: A poll of U.S. voters conducted from July 21-22 found Trump's approval rating was at 46% while 47% disapproved. The credibility interval, similar to a margin of error, was plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. Fox News poll: A poll conducted from July 18-21 under the direction of Beacon Research and Shaw & Company research found that 46% approval of Trump's job performance while 54% disapprove. Gallup poll: Trump has a 37% approval rating in a poll from July 7-21, down several percentage points from his second term average of 42% so far. It's his lowest job approval rating to date in his second term. New York Times poll: New York Times tracks the 'daily average of polls conducted by dozens of different organizations,' showing that as of Tuesday, Aug. 5, the president's approval rating is at 44% while his disapproval rating is at 53%. Quinnipiac University poll: A poll from July 10-14 of self-identified registered voters nationwide found that 40% approved of Trump's handling of his job while 54% disapproved. The margin of effort was plus or minus 2.7 percentage points. Reuters/Ipsos poll: A poll from July 25-27 that surveyed 1,023 U.S. adults nationwide found 40% approved of Trump's performance while 56% disapproved. The poll had a margin of error of 3 percentage points. Paris Barraza is a trending reporter covering California news at The Desert Sun. Reach her at pbarraza@ This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Trump approval rating: What polls show for California, the U.S.
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
JD Vance to visit Indiana amid push for redistricting. Will Braun call special session?
Vice President JD Vance is visiting Indianapolis on Aug. 7 to speak with Gov. Mike Braun about the possibility of redistricting the state's congressional districts amid the Trump administration's push to increase the GOP majority in the House. Braun didn't rule out calling a special session to redraw the Hoosier State's congressional districts in an attempt to squeeze in another Republican seat ahead of the 2026 midterms. Republicans already hold seven of Indiana's nine U.S. House seats, but Braun's comments come as the Trump administration has encouraged other states to take up mid-decade redistricting to help maintain a GOP majority in the House after next year's elections. The redistricting process is already underway in Republican-led Texas where new congressional maps would give the GOP in that state five additional U.S. House seats. The effort resulted in Texas Democrats fleeing to Illinois on Aug. 3 to disrupt legislative procedures. What would it take to redistrict in Indiana? Braun would have to call a special session for the Indiana General Assembly if Republicans decide they want to redraw Hoosier congressional maps. House Speaker Todd Huston and Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray, both Republicans, have not responded to IndyStar questions through spokespeople about whether Trump has contacted them or if they have an appetite to draft new maps. It's likely U.S. Rep. Frank Mrvan's 1st District seat in Northwest Indiana would be a signature focus of any redistricting efforts at the Statehouse, although some national outlets have reported longtime Indianapolis U.S. Rep. Andre Carson's 7th District seat could be targeted as well. National Republicans have targeted Mrvan's seat as a flip opportunity for the last two election cycles and are poised to again in 2026, especially as Northwest Indiana's rust belt communities have voted more Republican over the years. 'I think this seat is one that belongs in the Republican column,' House Speaker Mike Johnson told IndyStar in 2024. But Mrvan has still defeated his Republican challengers, winning reelection in 2022 by nearly six percentage points and in 2024 by eight percentage points. When did Indiana last go through redistricting? State lawmakers last went through redistricting in 2021 following the 2020 U.S. Census. At that time, Republicans left Mrvan's seat alone. Instead, they further cemented GOP grip on the 5th Congressional District after now-U.S. Rep. Victoria Spartz defeated Democrat Christina Hale by four points in a nationally-watched race in 2020. Since then, Spartz has won general election contests in 2022 and 2024 by double-digit percentage points over her Democratic opponents. The 2021 congressional maps also adjusted the boundaries of the 6th Congressional District, now represented by Republican U.S. Rep. Jefferson Shreve, to include the southern portion of Indianapolis. Some Republicans at the time criticized the move as potentially minimizing the voices of more rural communities in that district. This story will be updated. Contact IndyStar state government and politics reporter Brittany Carloni at Sign up for our free weekly politics newsletter, Checks & Balances, curated by IndyStar politics and government reporters. This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: JD Vance to visit Indiana amid push for redistricting
