Sen. Maria Cantwell says improving weather warnings after Texas floods is a "national responsibility"
"It's not community to community. It's a national system," said Cantwell on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan." "And we share that with local people to help them best respond."
Since the July 4 flash floods in Kerr County, Texas, officials have confirmed at least 129 people are dead and more than 170 remain missing as of Sunday morning. Over the weekend, search and recovery efforts were temporarily halted for the first time due to new flood threats, as additional rain and rising water levels prompted fresh warnings from the National Weather Service.
The Washington Democrat, who chairs the Senate Commerce Committee, said Sunday that she plans to send a letter to President Trump outlining bipartisan recommendations to upgrade the country's forecasting infrastructure. Among them are improvements to Doppler radar, increased use of ocean buoys to track sea temperatures, and enhanced data analytics and computing power for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
"What the real question is, is what can we do to improve the weather forecasting of this nation," Cantwell said. "To use science, to use better assets, to really do a once in a lifetime investment to upgrade the system."
She pointed to more accurate tornado forecasts in the Midwest – where residents received two hours of warning – as evidence that federal investment in weather science can save lives.
"We should be the smartest government in the world using technology, analyzing the data, and putting a forecast system into place that gives people that kind of system," she said.
The senator also warned against proposed budget cuts and privatization efforts under the Trump administration, which she said could undermine NOAA's mission. During the Texas floods, key forecasting and IT positions at the National Weather Service were unfulfilled, according to the union that represents NWS staffers. The vacancies raise questions about whether staffing shortages may have contributed to delays in emergency alerts.
But Cantwell said "it's a miniscule amount of money" compared to the cost of disaster recovery, and she added that small businesses and first responders rely on government-issued alerts.
Cantwell said she hasn't decided whether she will vote to confirm NOAA administrator nominee Dr. Neil Jacobs. The senator said she was pleased in a Senate hearing this week that Jacobs made "some very positive" commitments about supporting the Organic Act, which is aimed at establishing the NOAA as an independent agency. Before making a decision, Cantwell said she wants to "drill down" on Jacobs' thoughts about how to preserve the science mission amid increased spending on storms.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
25 minutes ago
- CNN
How Trump came around to a novel plan to send weapons to Ukraine
When President Donald Trump won last year's election, European officials quickly began discussing how to sustain US weapons shipments to Ukraine under a leader who had vowed to pull back American support. Eight months later, the results of that plan are coming into view, with Trump on board with a novel idea to sell US weapons to European nations that will then transfer them to Kyiv. The president is expected to announce the plan around a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on Monday. In addition to Patriot missile batteries — the top item on Kyiv's wish list and one Trump said Sunday was vital to Ukraine's defenses — the US could also sell short-range missiles, Howitzer rounds and medium-range air-to-air missiles to NATO members, which would then be transferred to Ukraine, a person familiar with the deliberations said. The thinking behind Trump's decision is multifold, officials said. By selling weapons to European nations, rather than transferring them to Ukraine itself, Trump hopes to insulate himself from political criticism that he is reversing a campaign pledge to reduce the US role in the years-long war. He is also expecting a financial windfall: each Patriot missile system costs roughly $1 billion and he has already touted the profits for the US as part of the scheme. American officials also noted it would be quicker to get the Patriot systems to Ukraine if they are already in Europe as opposed to moving them from the United States or producing them new at a US factory. And, at least in the view of some US officials, providing Ukraine with a surge in new weaponry could send a signal to Moscow that Trump is serious about his frustrations with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who the US leader accused of peddling 'bullshit' last week. 'He's seriously frustrated with Putin,' a US official said. 'He wants to show he's serious about ending the war, and maybe this will show Putin it's time to start negotiating.' The plan was discussed in earnest around last month's NATO summit in the Netherlands, where Trump met with European leaders and the Ukrainian president for talks described by people familiar as surprisingly productive. But its origins actually came months earlier, after Trump won last year's election — thrusting US support for Kyiv into fresh doubt. European officials, at that stage, began conceiving of a way to allow for continued weapons support to Ukraine even if Trump pulled back Washington's role, as he had promised as a candidate. For the last two weeks, officials in the US and Europe have been working on the details of how the plan would operate. NATO does not itself dispatch weapons to Ukraine, but rather acts as a clearinghouse, coordinating deliveries from individual countries. The mechanism for transferring the weapons could include European nations transferring weapons already bought from the United States and backfilling them with new purchases. Or they could purchase new US weapons for immediate transfer to Ukraine. Among the countries already on tap to participate are Germany and Norway. Officials said at least four other countries are likely to join. Trump spoke last week to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and Merz said on the call he was looking for the US to deliver the systems to Germany so they could be transferred to Ukraine, a person familiar with the call said. He also spoke on Thursday with Rutte to discuss the initiative and lay plans for the secretary general's visit to the White House on Monday. Rutte later spoke with top US military officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to delve further into the details of the plan. On that call, Rutte said he'd received several messages of interest from European nations looking to join in, a person familiar said. Ukraine has said it needs 10 new Patriot systems to protect itself against Russia's increased onslaught of missiles and drones. At last month's NATO meeting in the Netherlands, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky presented Trump and other leaders with a list of weaponry he said his country needs to stave off Russia's invasion, according to a US official. Trump has signed off on some of the items.
Forbes
29 minutes ago
- Forbes
Black Oil And Green Energy In Mega Bill Will Boost Oil But Cost U.S.
Workers extracting oil in the Permian Basin in Midland, Texas. Energy policy in the U.S. has changed dramatically since OBBBA (One Big Beautiful Bill Act) has been signed into law. This will affect energy markets significantly. In some cases, tax credits will disappear sooner. In other cases, imports from countries like China may be restricted. The uncertainty of U.S. policies from one four-year government to the next will destabilize some 20-30 year deals. Will the oil and gas industry thrive or dive? A survey of key issues provides some answers. An insightful assessment of policy changes by the OBBBA has been documented by Wood Mackenzie. Let's take a look at the consequences, especially for the oil and gas industry. Headwinds for Renewable Energies The applicable tax credits are curtailed for wind and solar projects. 10-year installations could fall by 17% for solar and 20% for wind. It might be worse because compliance restrictions may hurt Chinese-supported manufacturers. Handicapping certain green projects in this way is hard to understand because in the U.S. over 90% of new energy projects in 2023 and 2024 was generated by solar, wind, and batteries. At-risk projects could amount to several hundred GW (gigawatts), with the largest of such projects in California, Texas, and central U.S. The biggest losses may be, first, soaring electricity costs in the U.S., because renewables have dominated new sources of power in the last couple of years. The second loss is the U.S. ignoring China's surging solar and battery energy storage systems (BESS) that will reliably service their AI data center programs—meaning the U.S. may lose the AI race. Could green projects that lost their tax credits go ahead to completion? They might, but it's obvious this would translate to higher cost of electricity for consumers. The only commercially proven competitor is gas-fired power plants, which are facing serious delays, and they cost more. Battery Energy Storage Battery energy storage systems are booming in Australia, where renewable electricity in one state is running at 75% of total. The U.S. and the rest of the world are catching up on the use of BESS to stabilize solar and wind power. China is bidding record low prices for new BESS, which is the key to making solar PV and wind a dispatchable source of electricity—at the lowest price for new build systems. The OBBBA will maintain tax credits through 2030, which is good because data centers for AI and other interests will require a massive increase in electricity in the U.S., starting now. But BESS still faces Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC) restrictions that could prevent the U.S. from buying Chinese battery cells. Electric Vehicles Lose Tax Credits Soon The best time to buy an EV is now, because tax incentives run out on September 30, 2025 (they would have lasted another seven years under the previous administration). Wood Mackenzie predict that the market for EVs will drop in 2030 from 23% to 18%. Companies that sell EVs made in the U.S., such as Tesla, will suffer, and U.S. greenhouse gas emissions will remain higher. Dropping the tax credit on EVs is one way the Trump administration is supporting the oil and gas industry, when crude oil is down to $60. Despite this, demand for crude oil will eventually fall as cars and trucks switch to EVs and gasoline/diesel usage drops. Some observers are predicting peak oil is imminent in the mighty Permian basin, and in the whole world by 2030. After peak oil, the demand for crude falls, albeit slowly. Emerging Technologies Show A Mix Of Results Nuclear and geothermal retain the support provided by the previous Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) incentives, with a couple of upgrades. First, funding for small nuclear reactors (SMR) will be revised. This will be necessary since recent reports show that SMRs, now and through 2030, are significantly more expensive than renewable energies. Second, annual lease sales have been mandated by the OBBBA, and this should accelerate investments in next-gen geothermal energy. But with tax credits based on utility scale projects, solar PV plus BESS and wind plus BESS are cheaper than geothermal with tax credits, and much cheaper than nuclear (and gas-fired or coal-powered units). Since the OBBBA handicaps wind and solar in the energy race, electricity costs from nuclear and geothermal will move upwards. Carbon Capture And Storage (CCUS) This technique gets a boost because it's connected to oil production. Previously there were two levels of tax credits: a higher level if injection of greenhouse gases like CO2 was not used for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), and a lower level if it was. The OBBBA has raised the lower level to the higher level, which benefits the oil and gas industry. In essence the government pays the oil industry more to bury CO2 emissions, that come from burning oil, in a process that produces more oil to be burned. It's a win for oil production, but not for greenhouse gas emissions. The OBBBA will benefit a company like ExxonMobil that already has about 20 working CCUS injection projects. Big Win For Upstream Sector The survey report listed several direct benefits of OBBBA to the oil and gas industry, including the following. First, leasing and royalty issues are being changed. There will be quarterly lease sales mandated in nine western states. Also, royalty rates will be reduced from 16.7% to 12.5%. But are oil companies prepared to drill more wells when the price of oil hovers above $60 per barrel? Since the drop on June 24, WTI prices have risen slowly from $64 to $68. But companies have been in a period of increasing capex efficiency, and are wary of starting new drilling programs. A recent survey by the Dallas Federal Reserve indicated a general tightening due to oil price, cost of steel pipes, tariff uncertainty, and produced water woes in the Permian basin. Second is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which as expected will be opened to competitive leasing. Third is tax benefits for oil and gas companies. The new bill allows full deduction of intangible drilling costs, and extends a bonus depreciation (described as massive) to production real property through 2031. What does all this mean? There are direct policy benefits for the oil and gas industry, as discussed above, and these are expected from a 'drill, baby, drill' mantra. But the indirect benefits seem to reflect a posture against green energy, related to unbelief in climate change, and these lead to support for inefficient energy alternatives like nuclear and geothermal and gas-fired turbines. This policy will lead to more expensive electricity in the U.S. and a serious delay in the race against China for AI dominance.
Fox News
33 minutes ago
- Fox News
Former Obama speechwriter admits shunning conservative in his family was a mistake
A speechwriter for former President Barack Obama suggested in a guest essay on Sunday that it might be time to stop shunning conservatives over a disagreement with their politics. David Litt wrote in The New York Times that he felt "a civic duty" to be rude to his brother-in-law, citing his support for Joe Rogan and disagreements over the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines. "My frostiness wasn't personal. It was strategic. Being unfriendly to people who turned down the vaccine felt like the right thing to do. How else could we motivate them to mend their ways?" Litt wrote. However, Litt revealed that he wanted to take up surfing and his brother-in-law, Matt, was the only surfer he knew. So, Litt wrote, he put his unfriendliness towards him aside, and admitted his cold shoulder towards Matt had backfired. "Matt and I remain very different, yet we've reached what is, in today's America, a radical conclusion: We don't always approve of each other's choices, but we like each other," Litt conceded. Litt said his brother-in-law's generosity while they surfed together made him rethink his behavior, and that his surfing guidance had made Litt more courageous. "Ostracizing him wouldn't have altered his behavior — and it would have made my own life worse," Litt wrote. "Our differences are meaningful, but allowing them to mean everything is part of how we ended up here. When we cut off contacts, or let algorithms sort us into warring factions, we forget that not so long ago, we used to have things to talk about that didn't involve politics. Shunning plays into the hands of demagogues, making it easier for them to divide us and even, in some cases, to incite violence," he wrote. According to Litt, Matt had told him he would vote for him if he ran for office. Litt added that he would still decline a surf lesson with Trump aide Stephen Miller, but suggested he wouldn't close the door on a person over a political disagreement. "In an age when banishment backfires, keeping the door open to unlikely friendship isn't a betrayal of principles — it's an affirmation of them," Litt continued. Several liberals have agreed that cutting ties with family members over their support for Trump in 2024 might be necessary, especially around the holidays. The co-hosts of "The View" agreed with the notion, calling it a "moral issue."
