KTBB News, Weather, Talk

McALLEN, Texas (AP) — A federal judge in Texas on Monday paused a Biden administration policy that would give spouses of U.S. citizens legal status without having to first leave the country, dealing at least a temporary setback to one of the biggest presidential actions to ease a path to citizenship in years.

The administrative stay issued by U.S. District Judge J. Campbell Barker comes just days after 16 states, led by Republican attorneys general, challenged the program that could benefit an estimated 500,000 immigrants in the country, plus about 50,000 of their children. The states accused the administration of bypassing Congress for “blatant political purposes.”

One of the states leading the challenge is Texas, which in the lawsuit claimed the state has had to pay tens of millions of dollars annually from health care to law enforcement because of immigrants living in the state without legal status.

President Joe Biden announced the program in June. The court order, which lasts for two weeks but could be extended, comes one week after the Department of Homeland Security began accepting applications.

“The claims are substantial and warrant closer consideration than the court has been able to afford to date,” Barker wrote.

Barker was appointed by former President Donald Trump in 2019 as a judge in Tyler, Texas, which lies in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a favored venue for advocates pushing conservative arguments.

The judge laid out a timetable that could produce a decision shortly before the presidential election Nov. 5 or before a newly elected president takes office in January. Barker gave both sides until Oct. 10 to file briefs in the case.

The policy offers spouses of U.S. citizens without legal status, who meet certain criteria, a path to citizenship by applying for a green card and staying in the U.S. while undergoing the process. Traditionally, the process could include a years-long wait outside of the U.S., causing what advocates equate to “family separation.”

The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately return an email seeking comment on the order.

“The court’s decision tonight to halt the federal government from providing relief is devastating to the thousands of Texas families that could have benefited from this program,” Jessica Cisneros, an attorney for the advocacy organization the Texas Immigration Law Council, said Monday.

Several families were notified of the receipt of their applications, according to attorneys advocating for eligible families who filed a motion to intervene earlier Monday.

“Texas should not be able to decide the fate of hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens and their immigrant spouses without confronting their reality,” Karen Tumlin, the founder and director of Justice Action Center, said during the press conference before the order was issued.

The program has been particularly contentious in an election year where immigration is one of the biggest issues, with many Republicans attacking the policy and contending it is essentially a form of amnesty for people who broke the law.

Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton cheered the order.

“This is just the first step. We are going to keep fighting for Texas, our country, and the rule of law,” Paxton posted on the social media platform X.

To be eligible for the program, immigrants must have lived continuously in the U.S. for at least 10 years, not pose a security threat or have a disqualifying criminal history, and have been married to a citizen by June 17 — the day before the program was announced.

They must pay a $580 fee to apply and fill out a lengthy application, including an explanation of why they deserve humanitarian parole and a long list of supporting documents proving how long they have been in the country.

If approved, applicants have three years to seek permanent residency. During that period, they can get work authorization.

Before this program, it was complicated for people who were in the U.S. illegally to get a green card after marrying an American citizen. They can be required to return to their home country — often for years — and they always face the risk they may not be allowed back in.

TEXAS – NPR is reporting that if you’re planning to squeeze in one last summer road trip over the coming Labor Day weekend, it won’t cost as much to fill up your tank compared to a few months ago. The national average for a gallon of regular has fallen more than 20 cents since May and is now at $3.38 — about 47 cents lower than this time a year ago. Experts say the trend is likely to continue in the coming months, possibly leading to $3-a-gallon gasoline for the first time since 2021. According to AAA, as of Thursday, the price per gallon for regular gasoline ranged from $4.59 in California, where state gas tax is the highest in the nation, to $2.93 in Mississippi, which has one of the lowest tax rates on fuel. “For every Mississippi, you have a California to balance it out,” says Andrew Gross, a spokesperson for AAA.

A year ago, excessive heat forced Texas refineries to curtail operations, and Hurricane Idalia temporarily shut down oil production in the Gulf of Mexico, which contributed to higher prices. Despite record-breaking heat waves across the country this summer, Texas and Louisiana, where the majority of U.S. refineries are located, haven’t been hit as hard. “The late-season wild card is always hurricanes,” says Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy. “If a hurricane makes landfall in a refining area, it can really disrupt things.” Forecasters have warned of a particularly active hurricane season this year, but things have been quieter than expected — so far. Hurricane Beryl did considerable damage in parts of the Caribbean and caused some disruptions to U.S. refinery operations, but things got back to normal pretty quickly. Even so, energy analyst Stephen Schork, who is principal and co-founder of The Schork Group, cautions that we are entering peak hurricane season, which falls between mid-August and late October. In 2005, the double wallop of Hurricane Katrina at the end of August, followed by Hurricane Rita nearly a month later, “completely disrupted the market and sent prices extremely higher,” he says.

AUSTIN (AP) — A Latino voting rights group called Monday for a federal investigation after its volunteers said Texas authorities raided their homes and seized phones and computers as part of an investigation by the state’s Republican attorney general into allegations of voter fraud.

No charges have been filed against any targets of the searches that took place last week in the San Antonio area. Attorney General Ken Paxton previously confirmed his office had conducted searches after a local prosecutor referred to his office “allegations of election fraud and vote harvesting” during the 2022 election.

Some volunteers whose homes were searched, including an 80-year-old woman who told her associates that agents were at her house for two hours and took medicine, along with her smartphone and watch, railed outside an attorney general’s office in San Antonio against the searches.

“We feel like our votes are being suppressed,” Roman Palomares, national president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, said Monday. “We’re going to get to the bottom of it.”

The investigation is part of an Election Integrity Unit that Paxton formed in his office. Paxton’s office did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment. The federal Justice Department declined to comment.

At least six members had their homes searched, Palomares said. They included Manuel Medina, a San Antonio political consultant, who claimed his home was searched for several hours while agents seized documents, computers and cellphones. Medina is the former head of the Bexar County Democratic Party and is working on the campaign of Democratic state House candidate Cecilia Castellano, whose home was also searched.

Nine officers also entered the home of volunteer Lidia Martinez, 80, who said she expressed confusion about why they were there.

“They sat me down and they started searching all my house, my store room, my garage, kitchen, everything,” Martinez said, and interrogated her about other members, including Medina.

The search warrant ordered officials to search any documents related to the election and to confiscate Martinez’s devices.

“I’m not doing anything illegal,” Martinez said she told agents. “All I do is help the seniors.”

Voter fraud is rare, typically occurs in isolated instances and is generally detected. An Associated Press investigation of the 2020 presidential election found fewer than 475 potential cases of voter fraud out of 25.5 million ballots cast in the six states where Trump and his allies disputed his loss to Democratic President Joe Biden.

HOUSTON – The Houston Chronicle reports the SCOPE Act is scheduled to go into effect Sunday — but a recent challenge to the Securing Children Online Through Parental Empowerment Act may prevent that. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a 501(c) nonprofit, sued to block enforcement of the law aimed to protect minors from “harmful content and data collection practices.” “Courts have already enjoined similar measures in California, Arkansas, Ohio, Mississippi, and Indiana,” the lawsuit reads. “While these efforts to protect young people are well-intentioned, they lack perspective. The idea that some types of social network use by some minors under certain conditions might adversely affect some segment of this cohort cannot justify imposing government restrictions on all social network use by all minors.” In the lawsuit filed Aug. 16 against Attorney General Ken Paxton, the nonprofit alleges the SCOPE Act infringes on more than just children’s rights.

“Texas has jumped on a misguided bandwagon of recent efforts to childproof the internet by passing the Securing Children Online Through Parental Empowerment Act,” the lawsuit reads. “The Act subjects all Texans — not just minors — to age registration as a condition of access to digital services. It requires online services to monitor their content, and depending on a service’s mix, requires even more intrusive and imperfect age-verification screenings as a condition to engage in protected speech, violating established law.” Introduced by Rep. Shelby Slawson as House Bill 18, the act requires digital service providers to follow these guidelines: Digital service providers must register the age of the person creating an account for the platform and prevent the person from altering his/her age at a later date; A minor’s parent and/or guardian must notify the digital service provider of the minor’s age or successfully dispute the registered user’s age. The target audience for the SCOPE Act is anyone younger than 18. The Chronicle previously reported Slawson said the bill, passed during the 88th Texas Legislative Session, aims to keep kids safe online while empowering parental involvement.

AUSTIN – The Austini American-Statesman reports that the UT System Board of Regents approved a new measure in its free speech policy Thursday barring the system and its institutions, including the University of Texas, from taking political stances or making statements on matters not immediately pertinent to their campuses or operations. It is not “the role of the UT System or UT institutions to adopt positions based on political or social passions or pressures,” the new rule states. “Institutions should not, in their official capacity, issue or express positions on issues of the day, however appealing they may be to some members of the university community,” the guideline continues. Though the regents’ new order does not affect individuals at the institutions, it applies to official system and university functions, ceremonies, publications and statements.

UT System spokesperson Paul Corliss said the change was inspired by the University of Chicago’s 1967 Kalven report that insists on the importance of institutional neutrality except for instances that directly threaten the university. The spokesperson said the change is intended to foster a climate in which students, faculty and staff members are freer to express their positions and beliefs. “The University of Texas System’s commitment to free speech and open inquiry is unequivocal and demonstrated by its earlier adoption of the principles set forth in the Chicago Statement on Free Speech,” Corliss’ statement said. “Similarly, today the Board of Regents endorsed an addition to UT System policy that further ensures that all members of its university communities are free to express their views. “Rooted in the Kalven Report from the University of Chicago, the policy reflects the principle that the institution’s role is not to take positions on political, social, or other matters unrelated to its operation but to uphold a community where students, faculty, and staff have the freedom to do so.”

DALLAS (AP) — The jersey Babe Ruth wore when he called his shot during the 1932 World Series, hitting a home run to center field, has sold at auction for over $24 million. Heritage Auctions said the New York Yankee slugger’s jersey went for $24.12 million early Sunday after a bidding war in Dallas that lasted over six hours. Heritage says the buyer wishes to remain anonymous. The record-breaking amount the jersey sold for topped fellow Yankee Mickey Mantle’s 1952 rookie card, which the Dallas-based auction house sold for $12.6 million in 2022.

Conflicting federal policies may force thousands of residents in flood-prone areas to pay more for flood insurance or be left unaware of danger posed by dams built upstream from their homes and worksites, according to an Associated Press review of federal records and data.

The problem stems from a complex set of flood policies and some national security precautions taken after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

To get the best discount on flood insurance, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s points-based rating system requires communities to chart all the homes, businesses and critical facilities endangered by a potential dam failure and warn people of their risk. But that’s difficult or even impossible in some communities, because other federal agencies restrict the release of such information for hundreds of dams that they own or regulate across the U.S., citing security risks.

The quandary has persisted for years, though federal officials have been warned of its implications.

Federal “dam information sharing procedures costs communities points, homeowners money, and potentially citizens lives,” a California emergency services official warned in a January 2020 presentation to FEMA’s National Dam Safety Review Board at an invitation-only meeting attended by dozens of federal and state officials.

The meeting’s minutes were provided to the AP this summer, nearly two-and-half years after the news organization submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to FEMA.

Since that meeting, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has begun publicly posting maps of areas that could be flooded if one of its hundreds of dams were to fail. But similar information remains restricted by other federal agencies, including by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates about 1,800 power-producing dams, and by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, whose 430 dams in the western U.S. include some of the nation’s largest structures.

The Bureau of Reclamation said in response to questions from the AP that it is revising its policies and will start sharing more information about dam-failure inundation zones in 2025, though it said the process could take more than eight years to complete for all its dams.

Meanwhile, FEMA is accepting public comment through Sept. 9 on potential revisions to its Community Rating System, which awards discounts on flood insurance in communities that take steps to reduce risks. During a FEMA public hearing Wednesday, the floodplain administrator for Phoenix — the nation’s fifth largest city — raised concerns that the conflicting federal policies regarding dam flood zones were unfair to communities trying to get better insurance discounts for their residents.

“I believe this is a punishment to us,” Phoenix floodplain administrator Nazar Nabaty told FEMA officials.
One community’s frustrations

Another community that has been affected by the information-sharing gap is Sacramento, California, which ranks among the most at-risk regions in the U.S. for catastrophic flooding. California’s capital sits at the confluence of two rivers and about 25 miles (40 kilometers) downstream from Folsom Dam, a large Bureau of Reclamation structure with a capacity that could cover the equivalent of the entire state of Rhode Island with a foot of water.

During a review about five years ago, Sacramento County achieved one of the best-ever scores in FEMA’s rating system. But the county did not qualify for the top flood-insurance discount because the Bureau of Reclamation’s restrictions regarding Folsom Dam made it impossible to meet FEMA’s criteria for mapping and public outreach about a potential dam break, said George Booth, the county’s former floodplain manager.

“We got wrapped around the axle,” said Booth, now executive director of the Floodplain Management Association, a professional organization that focuses on flood-risk reduction in California, Hawaii and Nevada.

The city of Sacramento, which receives a separate flood insurance rating, has faced similar struggles meeting FEMA’s standards for flood insurance discounts because of limited information about Bureau of Reclamation dams, said Rosa Millino, the city’s Community Rating System coordinator.

For an individual homeowner, the missed discounts could make about $100 difference in annual flood insurance premiums. When spread citywide, the extra cost could reach several million dollars. When costs are higher, fewer people tend to buy insurance. But there’s more at stake than just insurance premiums.

“People need to be informed of the potential dangers of living in an area that’s protected by a dam,” Millino said.
Flood risks and costs

As the climate changes, heavy rains from intense storms have put communities at increased risk of flooding and placed the nation’s aging dams in greater jeopardy of failing. That’s been evident as recent floodwaters damaged or breached dams in Georgia, Minnesota, New York, South Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin, forcing evacuations and costly repairs.

Floods have caused about $108 billion of damage in the U.S. since 2000, according to FEMA. Standard home and commercial property insurance does not cover flood damage.

But FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program is available in 22,692 communities that have adopted and enforced floodplain management regulations. As of the end of July, it provided $1.3 trillion of flood insurance coverage to about 4.7 million policyholders — down about 1 million policies since the program’s peak participation in 2009.

Premium discounts ranging from 5% to 45% are available in jurisdictions that participate in FEMA’s Community Rating System, a voluntary program begun in 1990 that grades flood mitigation and safety measures on a 1-to-10 scale. A Class 1 rating earns the largest discount.

Most communities don’t seek the extra savings. Just 1,500 local governments take part in the Community Rating System, though they account for three-quarters of policies issued under the National Flood Insurance Program. Just two communities — Roseville, California, and Tulsa, Oklahoma — have achieved the top discount for their residents.

Roseville, which also is near Folsom Dam, used FEMA grant money to create its own inundation maps showing the affects of a potential dam failure. But the city still encountered difficulties trying to share that information with residents. While presenting the inundation data at a public meeting over a decade ago, consultant Rob Flaner said a Bureau of Reclamation official interrupted and told him to stop.

“It was ironic that one federal agency funded it,” Flaner said. “It was like, `Ummm, maybe you guys need to talk to each other.’”

Roseville has since satisfied both federal agencies by creating inundation maps that show the overlapping flood potential of multiple dams without identifying the specific dam failure that could affect each home, business or important site, Flaner said. But Roseville is the exception, not the norm.

“There’s a lot of jurisdictions that can’t meet the requirements because they can’t get the maps, or a federal agency is saying, `No, do not do outreach downstream of our dam,’” said Flaner, who has worked with nearly 300 local governments over three decades, first as a Community Rating System specialist on behalf of FEMA and then as a hired consultant.
Security concerns

FEMA says it is important for communities to have access to dam-failure inundation maps in order to warn residents in harm’s way, That’s because dam failures can spread floodwaters beyond normal high-risk areas and affect multiple communities downstream.

But after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, some federal agencies cited national security grounds while refusing to release certain information about dams. They said dams could become targets if terrorists knew the potential to cause devastating flooding.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission continues to categorize dam inundation maps as critical infrastructure information that “could be useful to a person planning an attack” and requires those receiving such information to sign non-disclosure agreements, said FERC spokesperson Celeste Miller. But FERC can’t prevent a dam owner from independently sharing the information.

The Bureau of Reclamation also has required non-disclosure agreements when sharing dam inundation maps and emergency action plans with local officials. Under its upcoming policy change, the bureau will allow communities to publicly share information about dam inundation zones, including potential flood-wave travel times, flood depths and durations, said Sandy Day, the bureau’s chief of public affairs.

The Army Corps of Engineers, which also had shielded certain information about its dams, began posting dam inundation maps online in late 2021 after determining that releasing the information “is more beneficial to the public than any risk of misuse,” Corps spokesperson Gene Pawlik said.
A complex system

Three years ago, FEMA sought public input about ways to revamp the Community Rating System to better incentivize communities to reduce flood risks. Several commenters highlighted difficulties in getting credit for dam initiatives, including the reluctance of federal agencies to share information regarding inundation zones from dam failures.

Nothing immediate came from the 2021 review. Though FEMA is again seeking public input on potential changes to the Community Rating System, it doesn’t plan to make any changes until 2026.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office has suggested a substantial overhaul may be necessary. In a report last year, the GAO found that the premium discounts offered under FEMA’s rating system are not actuarially justified. Mapping projects, flood warning procedures and public information campaigns may have some value, the report said, but don’t reduce the flood risk of currently insured properties.

Some local officials contend FEMA’s Community Rating System is too costly and complex, especially for governments with small budgets and staffs. The rating system has about 100 items for which communities can earn points, often requiring extensive documentation. The dam safety section is among the most challenging — just four communities got any points for their local efforts during the most recent evaluation, according to FEMA data.

During its last review, Fort Collins, Colorado, earned more than 5,000 points in the Community Rating System — the most of any community, according to FEMA data. Yet the city failed to get a Class 1 ranking, because it didn’t meet criteria about potential dam failures or promoting flood insurance. The area has about 20 high-hazard dams that could result in loss of life if they failed.

“We do know where the dams are,” said Ken Sampley, the city’s water engineering director. “But we don’t have as detailed information and direct coordination with a lot of the dam owners as may be required.”

Thurston County, Washington, which is home to the state capital of Olympia, spends almost $200,000 a year to maintain its Class 2 rating in the flood insurance program, resulting in collective premium savings of slightly less than that for residents, said Mark Biever, who coordinated the county’s efforts from 2019-2023. But the county decided it wasn’t worth it to try for a Class 1 rating, in part because staff didn’t have the resources to compile all the information about dams, he said.

The rating process is frustrating and incredibly time-consuming, Biever said. Though it’s resulted in a 40% discount for about 600 flood-insurance policyholders, “nobody’s every called and said, `Hey thanks for all that extra effort,’” Biever added.

None of Thurston County’s cities and towns participate in the Community Rating System, meaning the county’s flood-insurance discount is only available in unincorporated areas.

In Bucoda, a rural Thurston County town nestled along the twisting Skookumchuck River, the high cost of flood insurance means homeowners often skip it unless required to buy it by a mortgage holder, said James Fowler, the town’s fire chief and planning commission chair. Yet the town is just 10 miles (16 kilometers) downstream from a dam.

“If that dam that’s on that reservoir was to fail, it would be catastrophic flooding,” Fowler said. “In a couple hours, there would be 20 feet of water in the town.”

Thousands of people live downstream from dams yet may not always realize the risks.

As the climate changes, heavy rains from intense storms have put communities at greater jeopardy from flooding and placed the nation’s aging dams at greater risk of failing. That’s been evident recently as floodwaters from storms damaged or breached dams in Georgia, Minnesota, New York, South Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin, forcing evacuations and costly repairs.

An Associated Press review found that conflicting federal policies may be inhibiting the ability of local officials to share details with residents, businesses and other property owners about the places that get could inundated with floodwaters if a dam were to fail. That same information gap also could be costing residents more for flood insurance.

The problem has persisted for years, though federal officials have been warned of its implications.

Here are some takeaways from the AP’s report on the conflicting federal policies about potential dam failures.
Flood insurance details

The Federal Emergency Management Agency oversees a flood-insurance program available in communities that adopt and enforce floodplain management regulations. Nearly 22,700 local governments participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. As of the end of July, it provided $1.3 trillion of insurance coverage to about 4.7 million policyholders — down about 1 million policies since the program’s peak participation in 2009.

FEMA also oversees a voluntary program that offers discounts on flood insurance. The Community Rating System grades a community’s flood mitigation and safety measures on a 1-to-10 scale, with Class 1 being the best.

A Class 1 ranking entitles a community’s residents to a top discount of 45% on their flood-insurance premiums. But it’s not easy to achieve. Just two of the 1,500 local governments taking part in the Community Rating System have earned the top discount for their residents.

One of the areas evaluated by the Community Rating System focuses on dams. To receive a top ranking, communities must maintain maps showing the homes, businesses and critical facilities that could get inundated with floodwaters if a dam were to fail and provide public outreach about the potential risks. Just four communities nationwide have earned any credit for their local efforts regarding potential dam failures.
Secrecy about dams

One reason so few communities have qualified for top flood-insurance discounts is that some federal agencies have prohibited the release of inundation maps for dams that they own or regulate.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, some federal agencies cited national security grounds while refusing to release certain information about dams. They feared dams could become targets if terrorists knew the potential to cause devastating flooding.

The Bureau of Reclamation owns 430 dams in the western U.S., including some of the nation’s largest structures. But it has required non-disclosure agreements when sharing dam inundation maps and emergency action plans with local officials. That has inhibited officials from sharing specific information about the risks of dam failures with residents who could get flooded.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates about 1,800 power-producing dams, categorizes dam inundation maps as critical infrastructure information that “could be useful to a person planning an attack” and requires those receiving such information to sign non-disclosure agreements. But FERC can’t prevent a dam owner from independently sharing the information.

Records obtained by the AP show that a California emergency services official raised concerns about the policies during a January 2020 meeting of FEMA’s National Dam Safety Review Board.

The federal “dam information sharing procedures costs communities points, homeowners money, and potentially citizens lives,” he said, according to meeting minutes that were released to the AP this summer, nearly two-and-half years after the news organization submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to FEMA.
Are changes coming?

In response to questions from the AP, the Bureau of Reclamation said it is revising its policies and will start allowing communities to publicly share information about dam inundation zones, including potential flood-wave travel times, flood depths and durations. The bureau said the changes will begin in 2025, but it could take more than eight years to complete for all its dams.

Since the 2020 meeting, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also has become more transparent about the flood-risks from its dams. The Corps began posting dam inundation maps online in late 2021 after determining that releasing the information “is more beneficial to the public than any risk of misuse.”

FEMA is considering potential changes to the Community Rating System for flood insurance. The agency sought sought public input in 2021 about ways to revamp the system to better incentivize communities to reduce flood risks. Several commenters highlighted difficulties in getting credit for dam safety initiatives, including the reluctance of some federal agencies to share information regarding inundation zones from dam failures.

Nothing immediate came from that review. This summer, FEMA again opened a public comment period on potential changes to the Community Rating System. People can submit suggestions through Sept. 9. But FEMA doesn’t expect to make any changes until 2026.