Starting today, companies drilling for natural gas in Texas must disclose the chemical compounds they use for hydraulic fracturing on the website FracFocus. While this doesn’t apply to existing wells, any companies seeking new drilling permits from the Texas Railroad Commission must comply with the rule. This is a step in the right direction, but it doesn’t address the real problems associated with fracking.
The slurry of water, sand, and chemicals which are forced at high pressure deep into shale formations in order to “crack” open the shale and release natural gas has been blamed for numerous health issues. Six counties in the Dallas area (which are on the Barnett Shale gas patch) have considerably higher rates of invasive breast cancer than the rest of the state. In a fracking zone near Midland, a mile long plume of hexavalent chromium (which is absurdly nasty stuff) was found in the ground water in 2009.
While the TRC’s new rules will help the public understand what is in fracking fluid, it will most likely not correct the public health concerns. Fracked wells are required to encase the bore holes in a concrete and steel from the surface down to a point where the well has “safely” crossed through the water table. At the extremely deep levels that these wells are operating, the wells do not have enough water pressure to pump all of the fracking fluid out of the well. In fact, a water treatment company, ProChem Tech, estimates that only 10-20% of water injected into the wells is recovered. Some of this water, which can come into contact with strontium and other radioactive compounds, is thought to migrate up through the earth’s crust, where it re-enters the ground water.
The vast amount of water required for fracking is perhaps even more disturbing given the historic drought in Texas. According to an EPA estimate, a single well pad (which can support up to 16 wells) can use over 80 million gallons of water a week. In La Salle county, 40% of the groundwater is used for fracking. That is an unconscionable amount of water in a state full of communities that are literally running out of water.
There are new techniques that might alleviate the massive use and contamination of water without jeopardizing gas production, but they are still far from being commonplace. An encouraging new procedure, gasfracking, uses liquified propane in place of the water/sand slurry. The liquified propane is supposedly better at extracting natural gas, and is less likely to mix with, and thereby pollute, groundwater. While this process is relatively common in Canada, it has only been used in a handful of wells in Texas. The capital investment cost in a gasfracked well is considerably higher than a traditional water well, but additional legislation could make it more attractive.
State Rep. Joe Deshotel (D) released a statement yesterday applauding the Railroad Commission’s new rule, but cautioned that the Legislature is ill-equipped to address the environmental concerns generated by our massive energy industry
Given that the Texas Legislature meets 140 days every other year, it may prove beneficial to hold interim joint committee hearings or charge a select committee with addressing more of these concerns. Such a format could cover recurring themes such as well integrity, groundwater contamination, water management, wastewater disposal and infrastructure planning.
Texas has taken the lead nationally by working with all parties in developing a model chemical disclosure procedure managed through the Texas Railroad Commission. Now the Legislature should build upon this success to address other public concerns.
Whether one supports or opposes the actions of the Craddick D's last session, they chose to establish themselves as a separate group in the Texas Legislature. Calling themselves "Democrats for Reform," they laid out an agenda at the start of session. At the end of session, they claimed their agenda was a success, and that the key successes for Democrats this session were the result of the deals they had struck with Speaker Craddick. They also touted the personal victories they won for their district by supporting Craddick, and many were proud to call themselves "Craddick D's."
It should be noted, though, that only a handful of those who attended the first press conference (announcing the Democrats for Reform, at the start of session) attended the second (after the challenge to Craddick at the end of May). More over, the voracity to which "their agenda" can be called a success was called into question.
With the announcement that Chairman Robert Puente will retire, I thought it would be appropriate to see exactly how those "Democrats for Reform" are doing today. This is merely meant as an update -- trying to keep track of our Democrats in the Texas House. I select them out as a group not out of hostility, but because they chose to set themselves apart from the House Democratic Caucus.
Update: To clarify, I designated whether or not any of the following State Representatives would "still vote for Craddick" based on their last known public position -- which I sourced as best as possible in the middle column. Any additional news that any of the Members or anyone else wish to share, please send me an e-mail or post a comment, and I will update the chart appropriately.
The Craddick D's: Where We Are Today - October 22, 2007
Voted "present, not voting" during Rep. Haggerty's roll call speech; Rep. Chavez was quoted in the Houston Chronicle saying she would support new leadership in 2009.
No
Deshotel, Joe
Voted "against" Craddick during Rep. Haggerty's roll call speech.
No
Dukes, Dawnna
Though there were rumors that some in Austin were looking for a primary challenger, none have surfaced. The last known public statement was that Rep. Dukes stands by Craddick - though I'm not certain she'd vote for Craddick again.
Was one of the handful of Democrats proudly trumpeting the "Democrats for Reform" agenda at the end of session. No other public indication of her stance, and no primary news to date.
Yes
Guillen, Ryan
No challenger, no news. Though if the budget committee is still this hard, would he want it?
On the motion to vacate at end of session, was said to be "flip-flopping." No news, though with Rep. Puente's retirement, she is the only Craddick-supporter in San Antonio.
Of the 15, there are definitely 5 fewer supporters for Craddick, two "maybes" (three, if you include Rep. Turner), three Craddick D's facing primary challenges, and maybe a few more who would no longer call themselves Craddick D's.
Remember the Craddick 15. The 15 Democrats who helped Tom Craddick retain his seat as Speaker of the House. As a result, here are the assignments Papa Bear Craddick gave to his children:
Sylvester Turner: Speaker Pro Tempore; CBO of Regulated Industries; Calendars; Appropriations
Kevin Bailey: CHAIR of Urban Affairs; Business & Industry; General Investigating & Ethics
Norma Chavez: VICE CHAIR of Calendars; Appropriations; CBO of Financial Institutions
Joe Deshotel: CHAIR of Economic Development; Redistricting; Transportation
Dawnna Dukes: CBO of Culture, Rec & Tourism; Appropriations; Calendars
Kino Flores: CHAIR of Licensing & Administrative Procedures; Redistricting; Ways & Means
Helen Giddings: CHAIR of Business & Industry; VICE CHAIR of House Administration; Higher Education
Ryan Guillen: VICE CHAIR of Appropriations; Calendars; Natural Resources
Harold Dutton: CHAIR of Juvenile Justice & Family Issues; General Investigating & Ethics; Public Education
Tracy King: CHAIR of Border & International Affairs; Environmental Regulation
Eddie Lucio: CBO of Environmental Regulation; Appropriations; Local & Consent Calendars
Ruth Jones McClendon: CHAIR of Rules & Regulations; CBO of Pensions & Investments; Appropriations
Aaron Pena: CHAIR of Criminal Jurisprudence; Ways & Means
Robert Puente: CHAIR of Natural Resources; Local Government Ways & Means
Patrick Rose: CHAIR of Human Services; Higher Education
I want every Democratic activist to remember this list during the entire 80th Legislative Session - the 15 Democrats who enabled Tom Craddick to retain his undeserved Speakership:
Kevin Bailey
Norma Chavez
Joe Deshotel
Dawnna Dukes
Kino Flores
Helen Giddings
Ryan Guillen
Harold Dutton
Tracy King
Eddie Lucio III
Ruth Jones McClendon
Aaron Pena
Robert Puente
Patrick Rose
Sylvester Turner
Before I get into the heart of my argument, I want to give credit where credit is due. Democratic Leaders in the House, like Representatives Thompson and Dunnam and Gallego and Coleman, did yeoman work in holding 54 of 69 Democratic votes. Two sessions ago, Democrats couldn't get 50 votes for anything (just ask the trials). Two months ago, no one would have believed that Tom Craddick would have to endure am unprecedented 6-hour spectacle on the first day of session to retain his gavel. Now we're within striking distance of taking down the Speaker.
We witnessed real acts of courage from good democrats; Ritter and Eiland risking their chairmanships to do what was right, Hopson taking a principled stand at a critical moment, Martinez returning to the Democratic fold, and Raymond challenging the Speaker directly.
Despite the great work of these great Democrats, it is impossible to ignore the fact that the 15 Craddick Democrats provided Craddick with the margin he needed to get re-elected Speaker. These 15 Craddick enablers put their own best political interest ahead of their party and their constituents. Had just 7 of these 15 Democrats voted their conscience, voted their convictions, or voted their constituents - instead of merely voting their own selfish best interest - we would have kicked Craddick's ass off his $1000 throne.
We should thank each and every one of the 54 Democrats who had the courage to try and make Texas a better place. But let us never forget the Craddick 15.
(These 15 Democrats haven't budged and are set to give Craddick the margin he needs to remain as speaker. We brought 55 Democrats to the table to vote for change. They'll keep fighting through the session but we have long memories. Personally, I'm thinking these 15 may earn themselves a special place in a front page box here on BOR... - promoted by Burnt Orange Report)
Edited from the film below, here are the 10 Democrats who attended Tom Craddick's dinner at the Austin Club on January 7th to pledge their support. If they follow through and vote for him tomorrow, expect primary challengers to find this footage available to them. The House needs cleaning though it begins with Tom Craddick.
1. Joe Deshotel (512) 463-0662
2. Kino Flores (512) 463-0704
3. Ryan Guillen (512) 463-0416
4. Aaron Pena (512) 463-0426
5. Helen Giddings (512) 463-0953
6. Sylvester Turner (512) 463-0554
7. Dawnna Dukes (512) 463-0506
8. Ruth Jones McClendon (512) 463-0708
9. Norma Chavez (512) 463-0622
10. Patrick Rose (512) 463-0647
Other Democrats who have are still suspected as holding out for Craddick are as follows.
11. Kevin Bailey (512) 463-0924
12. Tracy King (512) 463-0194
13. Robert Puente (512) 463-0452
14. Harold Dutton (512) 463-0510
15. Eddie Lucio III (512) 463-0606
Please call your Representatives and the ones on this list to let them know that it is not too late to make the right choice. There is no need to go down with a sinking ship. Craddick can't touch many of these districts because they are so Democratic- they should be beholden to their Democratic Primary voters that put them into office.
Races for Speaker of the Texas House ostensibly are a "members only" affair. Ask a legislator what's happening and you'll get stiff-armed immediately. You'll get a polite brush off that "It's an internal deal."
However, it's the most important vote that a member ever casts and sets in motion how everything else is going to play out throughout the session and beyond.
And while a Member might claim this is a discussion among 150 legislators, the weapon that's used by the candidates or their team members has everything to do with insinuations about what lobbyists and special interests will be there for them in the next election and whether you'll get a primary opponent in the next cycle. We're already hearing the Craddick folks and the media talking about which Republican members will draw Leninger/Perry/Lobby fueled opponents if they vote for McCall but Craddick actually pulls it out.
But for the readers of this blog, the real red meat of the Speaker's race politics is what happens to the Democrats who don't stick with the Democratic Caucus on this one.
Thankfully, the Craddick Demo number is fast dwindling, but there seems to be some who'll stick with Craddick to the end.
Most are minority members who are in safe November General election districts. If they are going to be beat, it would have to be in a primary. The few Anglo Craddick supporters are in Republican leaning districts who think they're popular enough to win a primary challenge and will, by default, get solid Democratic support in the fall against a Republican. (Chuck Hopson and Patrick Rose). The other two Anglo Demos on the list are in "minority majority" or high minority impact districts and are even on more precarious ground (Tracy King and Kevin Bailey).
Perhaps the one with the most to lose career-wise is Patrick Rose. Although he's in a Republican leaning district and has to be moderate in his votes in the District, you can smell his ambition for statewide office in the future. To abandon the Democrats on this vote will probably be a fatal blow to his making it through a Democratic Primary for statewide office in the future. Primaries are notoriously progressive and this kind of back stab of the Party will be remembered.
One source tells BOR that Democratic leaders and activists have already began the discussions for opponents to Robert Puente and Ruth Jones McClendon in San Antonio, Sylvester Turner and Kevin Bailey in Houston, and Norma Chavez in El Paso.
Travis County politicos are burning up the holiday Party political gossip mill. They're all talking about perhaps the most endangered of the Craddick D's: Dawnna Dukes of HD 46 in Austin. What she gets for toading for Craddick hasn't been figured out. It's got most Travis County Democrats scratching their heads. Besides, Dukes has gained a reputation in recent years of being AWOL from representing her district. Representing a Travis County district is almost a full time job, and Dukes is rarely seen or heard from in political circles. Activists expect the Dems in Travis County's delegation to be not only at the Capitol, but at every neighborhood cookout and PTA meeting, and especially at Democratic events. Dukes hasn't been seen in a while. (And don't even bring up the anger from her French vacation that left the Democrats one vote short on a critical public education vote during the special session!)
HD 46 is what has been thought of as the traditional "African American" district in Austin. However this isn't like the other minority districts in Texas. African Americans aren't even a majority in the district. In fact the district is only voting age population of 26.1% African American, 32.6 % Anglo, and 37.9% Hispanic. The winner in a primary race here depends on progressive/liberal voters more so than the usual ethnic alliances.
Moreover, Dukes hasn't had a serious challenger in several cycles. Her worst enemy in pure political terms is the swing in voter turnout in the district. In 2006, the primary vote was only 2311 in the rep race. In 2004, turnout was 9662. The difference? A presidential primary. (District 46 contains a whole lot of young folks, UT students, and typical Austin slackers who turn out only for the presidential type races.) And you can bet that in 2008 with a heated prez race, the turnout in the campus and liberal precincts will soar. And that's the problem for Dukes. None of those "new" voters will have heard of her, and what they'll hear from a challenger will be that she's a Republican sell-out. These energized voters will vote against anything or anyone remotely "establishment" at the Lege.
And lastly, Dukes has no organization in Austin. Like most incumbents in safe liberal districts, she's not built any campaign apparatus. She has relied on the liberal political consultants that can influence the outcome of these races before filing day ink is dry. Rumors on the street are that those movers and shakers are doing the most talking about finding the opponent for her if she flubs this one. And even if they don't get out front for an opponent, none will want to take on the job of trying to sell that product. Dukes will be on her own.
And on top of it all for Dukes, a PAC has already been filed called "Too Close To Craddick PAC" whose purpose is to support challengers to Democrats who side with the Speaker. It's Austin based, and you can bet those behind it are looking locally before going statewide.
So watch the fallout. For the first time in history, the votes in a Speaker's race may be cast by members only, but those Democrats who piss on their constituents might have a rude and rank awakening in 2008.
