Is Harvey recovery changing the way Texas defines fiscal responsibility?
| Houston
Standing outside the Greenspoint Mall in North Houston, under a swelling mass of gray clouds, Nicole Turner reflects on the month she鈥檚 had. The single mom of four works for an oil and gas company and takes care of her mother. Then hurricane Harvey brought 52 inches of rain in four days.
Ms. Turner鈥檚 house flooded to the point where walls needed to be ripped out. The six of them are still living amid the damage.
鈥淚鈥檓 just trying to keep upbeat and keep going,鈥� she says. 鈥淵up.鈥�
That includes taking the day off work and waking up before dawn to get to the mall more than three hours before the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) disaster recovery center there opens. By 11 a.m., with the clouds thickening and starting to drizzle rain, Turner is still in line.
Like many of the hundreds of others lining up with her, she鈥檚 looking for any assistance she can get for her family. (鈥淛ust some help,鈥� she says.) And while she hasn鈥檛 had much time to think about the broader implications of the storm, there鈥檚 one aspect of the recovery debate she 鈥� and many others in line 鈥� has a firm opinion on.
鈥淚鈥檓 a native Houstonian so I鈥檝e seen us flood a couple times,鈥� she says. 鈥淚 definitely think that they should put some money into the sewer system, because if they don鈥檛 it鈥檚 going to happen again.鈥�
In recent years, high-cost investments in projects that could prevent or mitigate future flooding haven鈥檛 seemed a priority for many Texas congressmen, committed as they are to fiscal conservatism and limited government spending. (Several of those projects were in the works before Harvey, but stalled due to
That appears to have changed. The Texas delegation is now requesting billions of dollars for long-term flood mitigation projects from Washington. In the grand scheme of Harvey recovery, it seems a question of how, not if, Texans will re-evaluate some of the state鈥檚 core principles around issues like taxation and the role of government. This is not to say the Lone Star state is going on a spending spree, but experts see a growing sense among some lawmakers that fiscal prudence could include preventive measures.
鈥淲e鈥檙e seeing [that] very Republican or fiscally conservative voters, [and] fiscally conservative public officials, are in agreement that some changes will have to be made,鈥� says Ren茅e Cross, associate director of the Hobby School of Public Affairs at the University of Houston.
Commitment to fiscal conservatism
In of the US House and Senate appropriations committees last week, nearly all of the Texas delegation called for $18.7 billion more in federal funding for Harvey relief. More than half of those funds should be to help construct infrastructure to prevent and mitigate damage from future storms, the letter requested.
And while those investments may seem less urgent than funds for immediate problems like debris removal, Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner told a state appropriations committee otherwise last week.
鈥淣ow people are thinking of the question of: Should they rebuild where they鈥檝e been, or should they go somewhere else? And if people don鈥檛 know if we鈥檒l really be moving forward on mitigation projects that could take their home out of the floodplain, then we鈥檙e not giving them much hope,鈥� he told the state House Committee on Appropriations last week.
Mr. Turner, for his part, is hoping for a more significant show of financial support from the state 鈥� a show of support he knows the state isn鈥檛 used to making.
鈥淭his is when people see what government does,鈥� he said. 鈥淎nd government only functions with the resources.鈥�
Whether the Texas state legislature is willing to front the projects with its own money and be reimbursed later, as Turner suggested, is another question that could loom over the next few months. With the mayor estimating that expanding the bayous and constructing a third reservoir to mitigate flooding would require around $720 million, Congress could cover those costs if they give the Texas delegation the funds requested. If Congress isn鈥檛 so generous, however, the state鈥檚 fiscal conservatism will be tested further.
Despite the scale of Harvey鈥檚 damage 鈥� the storm destroyed about , with the governor estimating total damages in excess of $180 billion 鈥� Mark Jones, a fellow in political science at Rice University鈥檚 Baker Institute for Public Policy in Houston, doesn鈥檛 think the state鈥檚 own commitment to fiscal conservatism will bend too far in coming years.
鈥淭here may be [money] for an additional reservoir, some [home] buy-outs, but nothing game-changing,鈥� he says. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 expect a dramatic shift in spending patterns in Texas because of Harvey.鈥�
Toughest spending debates still to come
There will surely be uncomfortable debates over shifting those spending patterns, however. In fact, one has already unfolded.
After Harvey hit, Gov. Greg Abbott hesitated to appropriate state funds for the recovery 鈥� including tapping its $10 billion savings account (known as the Rainy Day Fund). In response Turner proposed an emergency one-year property tax hike to raise $50 million for recovery efforts, publicly blaming Governor Abbott鈥檚 inaction.
The spat concluded two weeks ago when Abbott, a Republican, , a Democrat, with a $50 million check taken from a $100 million disaster relief fund. Abbott says the Rainy Day Fund will be used, but only 鈥渨hen the expenses [of Harvey recovery] are known.鈥� Only the state legislature can decide when and how to use the fund.
So the most difficult debates won鈥檛 begin until the state legislature reconvenes in January 2019. It is likely to be a redux of battles in Austin between fiscal conservatives and freer-spending Democrats 鈥� with some moderate conservatives in between 鈥� says Professor Jones.
鈥淎 major cleavage in Texas politics over the past six-to-10 years has been with the Rainy Day Fund,鈥� he adds. 鈥淗ow much should be tapped to pay for recurring expenses like K-12 education and health care, and how much should be retained 鈥� for when we really have a rainy day?鈥�
For Harvey recovery, 鈥渢here鈥檚 a baseline amount [of the Fund] where there鈥檚 probably a pretty strong consensus,鈥� he continues, 鈥渂ut when you start rising up into additional money for buyouts or reconstruction efforts, new projects, that鈥檚 where some people 鈥� especially in other parts of the state 鈥� say, 鈥榃ait a second.鈥� 鈥�
'The most miserable tax ever created'
Of the many uncomfortable funding debates awaiting Texas politicians, perhaps none will be more sensitive than property taxes. A state cap on how much revenue cities and counties can generate from property taxes, enforced in the name of curbing excessive taxation and keeping local governments small, has been debated for years. Harvey has turned up the heat.
Turner and big city mayors across the state have long sought to ease the cap, arguing that it limits their ability to run city services effectively. In the wake of Harvey, he鈥檚 continued to press the issue.
The mayor now seems to be getting more support in softening Texans鈥� traditional aversion to taxes, including from colleagues across the aisle.
Ed Emmett 鈥� a judge in Harris County, which includes most of Houston, and a former Republican state legislator 鈥� said last week that he would push for a tax hike to help pay for new flood control infrastructure projects.
Property taxes are 鈥渢he most miserable tax ever created,鈥� . 鈥淏ut it鈥檚 what we鈥檝e been given to work with, so we don鈥檛 have a choice.鈥�
Cities and counties around Houston are also considering, or have already passed, . Some had been planned before Harvey hit.
But while there may be support for some property tax reforms at the local level, at least on a temporary basis, more permanent changes in how Texans are taxed are seen as unlikely.
鈥� 鈥楾axes鈥� is such a dirty word down here in particular, I would be hesitant to say that鈥� Harvey changed the debate, says Professor Cross.
That said, the definition of fiscal responsibility appears to be shifting in Texas. How far remains to be seen.
鈥淚t鈥檚 rare for a Republican to be [saying] that maybe we shouldn鈥檛 be building in floodplains, maybe there should be some regulations,鈥� says Cross. 鈥淭he wounds are still fresh right now, but we鈥檙e seeing folks crossing over the aisle and agreeing with each other here on the ground.鈥�
