Translate

Showing posts with label Chris Tomlinson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chris Tomlinson. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 23, 2026

Texas Is Legislating Growth on a Drying Planet—and the $174 Billion Bill for Texas’ Growth Machine Is Coming Due, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

Texas Is Legislating Growth on a Drying Planet—and the $174 Billion Bill for Texas’ Growth Machine Is 
Coming Due

by 

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

June 24, 2026

Chris Tomlinson’s recent column posted below, “Texas is running out of cheap water, and will need to make salty water sweet,” should land like an alarm bell across the state. His central point is simple and sobering: Texas is outgrowing its freshwater supply. Population growth, drought, fracking, semiconductor production, data centers, and the vast water needs of artificial intelligence are converging into a crisis that can no longer be deferred.

Link to PDF here
According to the Texas Water Development Board’s Draft 2027 State WaterPlan, implementing the recommended water management strategies is estimated to cost $174 billion, more than double the $81 billion estimated in the 2022 plan (Texas Water Development Board, 2026, p. 28). That number should stop us in our tracks. It tells us that the old bargain—grow endlessly, build endlessly, extract endlessly, and assume water will somehow be there—is breaking down.

Tomlinson rightly points to Corpus Christi as the canary in the coal mine. There, the city’s surface water supplies are running low, new groundwater wells have not delivered as hoped, and desalination remains expensive. 

Meanwhile, the endless drive to attract industry is increasingly ill advised, stretching the water supply beyond what residents can reasonably bear. The result is a familiar Texas pattern: public resources get promised to private growth, and ordinary people are left to pay the bill.

This is where the water crisis becomes more than an infrastructure problem. It is a democracy problem. Who gets to decide how much growth is too much? Who benefits from water-intensive development? Who pays when systems fail? Who is asked to conserve while industries expand? And whose communities are treated as sacrifice zones in the name of “economic development”?

These questions echo themes I have raised in other posts about the Hot Earth, climate disruption, and the extractive logic that governs so much of our public policy. Climate change is not some distant abstraction. It is arriving through heat, drought, flood, fire, migration, insurance costs, utility bills, and water scarcity. It is arriving through the quiet violence of unaffordability. It is arriving through the realization that the poor, the elderly, rural communities, and working families will be the first to experience what policymakers long treated as someone else’s future.

Tomlinson’s column is especially important because it pierces the illusion of cheapness. Texas has “run out of cheap water,” as Sen. Charles Perry put it. That statement deserves our full attention. Cheap water was never really cheap. It was subsidized by aquifers, rivers, ecosystems, Indigenous dispossession, rural extraction, underpriced infrastructure, and future generations who were never asked for consent. Now the bill is coming due.

Desalination may become part of the state’s water future, but it is not a magic wand. Making salty water sweet requires enormous energy. It also produces concentrated brine that must be handled carefully to avoid serious environmental harm. If desalination becomes another excuse for unrestrained growth, we will have learned nothing. We will simply be using more energy to solve the water crisis while worsening the climate crisis that intensifies drought in the first place.

The same concern applies to artificial intelligence and data centers. As I have written elsewhere in reflecting on AI and extraction, artificial intelligence is not weightless. It is not merely “in the cloud.” It is physical infrastructure: land, water, energy, minerals, labor, servers, cooling systems, and communities asked to absorb the costs. The language of innovation often hides the material reality of extraction. In Texas, that reality is becoming increasingly visible as rural communities confront large-scale data centers that demand huge amounts of water and electricity.

It is telling that even Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller has called for a moratorium on new data centers, warning that rural communities that have conserved water and land for generations are now being asked to compete with corporate giants whose demands could overwhelm local resources. 

That alone should widen the conversation beyond partisan politics. This is not simply a left-right issue; it is a question of stewardship, fairness, and whether Texas will protect the communities that have long sustained the state before handing scarce resources over to the highest bidder.

Water also forces us to rethink what we mean by prosperity. For too long, Texas leaders have equated growth with success. More highways. More subdivisions. More warehouses. More data centers. More fossil fuel extraction. More tax incentives. More ribbon cuttings. But growth without ecological limits is not prosperity. It is debt. It is risk. It is a form of policy denial.

And as with so many policy debates in Texas, inequality sits at the center. Wealthier households will absorb higher water rates more easily. Poor and working-class families will not. Rural communities may see their aquifers strained by development they did not invite. Colonias and historically underserved communities may face the worst infrastructure deficits. Urban residents may be told to conserve while industry receives favorable treatment. This is how environmental crisis becomes social crisis.

We should be deeply concerned that Texas is discussing water scarcity largely as an engineering challenge rather than a justice challenge. Pipes matter. Treatment plants matter. Desalination facilities may matter. But governance matters, too. Public voice matters. Conservation matters. Climate policy matters. Land-use planning matters. Accountability matters. Without these, water policy will reproduce the very inequities that brought us here.

The Legislature will have to confront this in 2027. But Texans should not wait for lawmakers to frame the issue for us. We need a broader public conversation now—one that includes educators, scientists, farmers, Indigenous communities, rural residents, environmental advocates, labor, students, and families already struggling with the cost of living.

Water is life. It is also memory, land, culture, food, health, and public trust. It is the connective tissue of ecology and democracy.

Texas can still choose a different path. We can invest in infrastructure, conservation, reuse, repair, and fair pricing. We can scrutinize water-intensive industries before granting them public support. We can protect communities from being overrun by extractive development. We can treat climate disruption as real rather than optional. We can insist that economic development serve the public good rather than private accumulation alone.

But we cannot keep pretending that endless growth is compatible with finite water.

Tomlinson’s column is a warning. Corpus Christi is a warning. The draft State Water Plan is a warning. The Hot Earth is warning us, too.

The question is whether Texas will listen before scarcity becomes policy, before crisis becomes normal, and before ordinary Texans are told—once again—that there is no alternative but to pay for decisions they did not make.

References

Texas Water Development Board. (2026). 2027 state water plan: Draft, phase 1. https://www.twdb.texas.gov/waterplanning/swp/2027/docs/DraftSWP27-Water-For-Texas.pdf

Tomlinson, C. (2026, May 21). Texas is running out of cheap water, and will need to make salty water sweet. Houston Chronicle

Texas faces a costly water crisis as growth, drought and industry outpace freshwater supplies statewide, writes columnist Chris Tomlinson.

By ,Columnist

Texas is outgrowing its freshwater supply.

Communities across the state need billions of gallons more water for growing populations and thirsty industries like oil and gas fracking, computer chip etching and artificial thinking. What happens this summer in Corpus Christi is a sign of what’s coming for all Texans.

The price of creating freshwater and keeping the economy growing will leave consumers with sticker shock, state lawmakers recently acknowledged. A draft of the 2027 State Water Plan says Texas will need to spend $174 billion to meet the water needs of the next 50 years — twice as much as lawmakers estimated just four years ago.


“The taxpayer is going to pay for this stuff one way or the other, be it property tax or be it fees, or be it insurance cost increases,” state Sen. Charles Perry, chairman of the Senate Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee, said during a hearing last week. “There is no free lunch here, or if they don’t pay, we end up with a Third World state.”


Inconvenient truths

Lawmakers will need to have “a big conversation” when they gather in Austin next year, Perry predicted. The level-headed Lubbock Republican is not prone to hyperbole or known for rhetorical flourish. When he speaks up, Texans best listen up.


Droughts and floods have complicated life in Texas for eons. The population and economy only began to grow once people started damming rivers and drilling into aquifers. But experts say those water sources are insufficient for a growing state.


Corpus Christi is the canary in our coal mine. The city’s surface water supplies are running low, new groundwater wells have disappointed, and citizens can’t afford to make seawater drinkable.

In the City Council’s drive to attract industry and bring in new jobs and revenue, it stretched the water supply too thin. Now that the inevitable drought has arrived, the council will likely declare an emergency and impose strict rationing.

Experts told the Senate committee on May 11 that while 57% of city-owned water utilities say they have long-term plans with sufficient funding, 10% have no plan, and 43% do not have enough money.

This year was the first time the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas fell short, capable of providing only $1.28 billion of the $4.2 billion that water utilities requested. The Legislature created the fund 11 years ago to help local authorities pay for water projects.

The Texas Water Development Board, which administers the fund, rejected the Nueces River Authority’s request for help financing a Corpus Christi desalination plant, claiming it had to prioritize other projects. 

Statewide, Texas doesn’t know where it will find 10 million to 12 million acre-feet of the 17 million the state will need over the next 50 years, Perry warned (an acre-foot is about 325,000 gallons). Making existing water treatment plants and pipelines more efficient will only meet 3% of the need.

“If I have to pick between spending all of my dollars on leaky pipes or all my dollars on supply, I will pick supply every day,” Perry said.

Water users will need a lot of dollars.

Well runs dry

Producing drinking water from ground or surface sources typically costs between $1.10 to $4.30 per 1,000 gallons, according to the Texas Comptroller’s Office. Desalination costs range from $7.50 to $11 per 1,000 gallons.

“Everyone in the audience is going to say, ‘That’s too much, that’s double what we’re paying,’” Perry said. “But that’s the cost of new water in Texas … we have run out of the cheap water.”

If Texans will pay those rates, utilities will deliver. Companies are working to permit three seawater desalination plants, with state officials anticipating seven plants along the coast over the next decade.

Arid nations around the world use desalination, but in addition to requiring a lot of energy, they produce a brine that is twice as salty as the water going in. If the waste stream isn’t handled properly, it can cause severe environmental problems.

Critics question the wisdom of trying to grow Texas beyond what its natural resources can sustain. Community activists want to prioritize residents’ quality of life over industrial development, and environmentalists want conservation over development.

Sid Miller, the Republican agriculture commissioner, called for a moratorium on data centers to conserve water.

“They draw massive volumes of water for cooling, even amid ongoing drought,” Miller wrote in a press release on Monday. “Rural communities that have conserved resources for generations now compete with corporate giants.”

Should a higher power grant South Texans' prayers and bring a week or more of steady rain, a heaven-sent storm will not solve the state’s long-term water shortage. We’ll still need to turn salty water sweet.

“We have a lot of poor people that aren’t going to be able to live in Texas much longer if we don’t figure this out, and there needs to be a sense of urgency about it,” Perry warned. “The status quo has to break.”

Award-winning opinion writer Chris Tomlinson writes commentary about money, politics and life in Texas. Sign up for his “Tomlinson’s Take” newsletter at houstonchronicle.com/tomlinsonnewsletter or expressnews.com/tomlinsonnewsletter.


Business Columnist

Chris Tomlinson writes commentary about money, politics and life in Texas for Hearst Newspapers. He can be reached at ctomlinson@hearstcorp.com.

In 2025, Tomlinson was inducted into the Texas Institute of Letters, an honor society that recognizes distinctive literary achievement. In 2021, the Texas Association of Managing Editors awarded him columnist of the year, and the Headliners Foundation named him Texas's Star Opinion Writer. He’s authored two New York Times Bestsellers, “Forget the Alamo: The Rise and Fall of an American Myth” and “Tomlinson Hill: The Remarkable Story of Two Families Who Share the Tomlinson Name - One White, One Black.”

Before joining the Houston Chronicle in 2014, he spent 20 years with The Associated Press reporting on politics, economics, conflicts and natural disasters from more than 30 countries in Africa, the Middle East and Europe.

Wednesday, July 07, 2021

What Underlies the Republican Party's Commitment to Ignorance and How this Puts All of Our Children in Harm's Way by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

by

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

In a June 28, 2021, New York Times op-ed, economist Paul Krugman asks the question of "What Underlies the G.O.P. Commitment to Ignorance?" The short answer is their political interests. 

Now let's go a bit deeper and consider its role in the current movement in Texas surrounding House Bill 3979 and Republicans' expressed stance against Critical Race Theory, a bill that is already law but that Governor Greg Abbott is bringing up again in the Texas Legislative session that begins tomorrow. Specifically, Abbott has presidential aspirations and playing to the base of a party by fostering fear of the endarkened "other" makes for good political theater. What should not at all get lost here is the depth of the party's extremism and how this should be of grave concern to the public.

Similar to the 2012 and 2020 Texas G.O.P. Platforms, HB 3979 offers a "solution" looking for a "problem," the problem being, far too many people using their critical faculties to oppose inequality in U.S. society. The Ethnic Studies Movement over the past several years and the racial justice movement last spring motivated bills like these that are springing up across the country.

As captured in a 2012 post to this blog, we must remind ourselves here in Texas of the willful ignorance of the G.O.P. that has been explicit in the Texas Republican Party platform as follows:

We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.

Compare this to the 2020 G.O.P. Platform. Whatever progress it makes with item 134 with teachers teaching "critical thinking skills, including logic, rhetoric, and analytical sciences within these subjects," this gets nullified with item 138 as follows:
"We reject Critical Race Theory as a post-Marxist ideology that seeks to undermine the system of law and order itself and to reduce individuals to their group identity alone. We support legislation to remove this ideology from government programs, including education involving race, discrimination, and racial awareness. To facilitate the appreciation of our American identity, the contrast between freedom and the tyrannical history of socialism/communism throughout history must be taught."
If we put aside the outright lie of what Critical Theory is and acknowledge that it is a legitimate, forty-year, approach to critical thought and thinking—one among many legal, policy and political tools in educators' craft—the deeper question is the source of this fear. 

Perhaps you saw, like I did, the July 5, 2021 interview of Chris Tomlinson on Joy Reid's "ReidOut" on his co-authored text titled, "Forget the Alamo: The Rise and Fall of an American Myth," a book that Gov. Abbot and Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick recently censured (read "

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick admits he told state museum to cancel 'Forget the Alamo' book event"). In response to Reid's query about why this was so, Tomlinson explains:

"We make the argument that the myths that were taught to people my age and younger, frankly, in Texas schools are hurtful to the growing plurality of Hispanics in Texas. It paints a picture of freedom-loving Anglos fighting against dark-skinned people for liberty. It completely ignores the role that slavery played in motivating this because we point out the inconvenient fact that Mexico is a multicultural society that had just overthrown Spanish colonial rule, was trying to outlaw slavery.

 President Santa Ana said before he crossed the border into Texas, 'I am going to free the wretched souls in bondage.' Saying those things in Texas is apparently...was going to get you slapped down."


Yes, distorted history is harmful and objectifying. Borrowing from Dr. Lisa Delpit's classic, "Other People's Children," the legislating of sanitized curricula is inescapably a patronizing expression of white supremacist privilege on what to do with, and how to teach, "other people's children" who, in republicans' eyes, neither have, nor should have, a right to a perspective— even when the historical record aligns or the large numbers of culturally and linguistically diverse children in our schools would seem to suggest.

Consider that according to 2019-2020 Texas Education Agency data, Latina/o students are the largest demographic group in our state's public schools (52.8 % enrollment), with white, African American and Asian American children equaling 27 %, 12.6%, and 4.6%, respectively.* 

Referring not to numbers, but to political power, public education in Texas is "minority education." Hence, the G.O.P.'s commitment to ignorance becomes decipherable.

While obviously harmful to minoritized youth, I would amend Tomlinson's point of "
hurtful to the growing plurality of Hispanics in Texas" to also include white children. I quote Texas A & M Professor Dr. Marlon James, with whom I recently spoke, who says that denying students our history makes all of our children vulnerable to extremism, putting them in harm's way. 

If you have any doubts about this, I encourage you to read Max Kutner's unsettling audiobook, Radicalized, that tells the story about how an eighteen-year-old, white American boy, Devon Arthurs, becomes a neo-Nazi—and later a Muslim jihadi—resulting in the violent murder of his two roommates. This chilling tale is partly chronicled in this AP News account titled, Deadly Shooting Ends Friendships Forged in Neo-Nazi Group. As Devon's parents were neither neo-Nazis nor jihadist, they never saw this coming. 

As I consider this horrible experience that this family endured, I cannot help but think that an authentic engagement with U.S. history, Women and Gender Studies, or Ethnic Studies might have been that ounce of prevention that might have engendered a pound of cure. It might have lessened Devon's vulnerability to extremist thought that in the beginning was little more than a young boy who was bullied in school, searching for a meaningful and powerful identity.

You see, nature hates a vacuum. And an empty, limited, self-serving history that HB 3979 represents is fertile ground for "free radicals" that can attach to any ideology or dogma, left or right, on the body politic. As the age-old dictum says, "If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there." Such free radicals become the cancer in the body.

Parents and people of good conscience, do duly note that while willful ignorance may preserve privilege and power for a time, in the long run, there are diminishing returns to this backward, medieval agenda. Even if the truth of history that HB 3979 seeks to outlaw makes us feel uncomfortable on occasion, let us be mindful of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s wise admonition:
"True peace is not merely the absence of tension: It is the presence of justice."
Hence, rather than shrinking from history and critical topics as the Texas GOP would have us do, the constructive, intellectual task is to let a thousand flowers bloom. Instead of censorship and narrowing curricula, we should allow for vigorous debate and democratic deliberation so as to illuminate and clarify our present condition as a society, and in so doing, provide goal posts and real policy solutions for just and humane public policy and practices that make for a better world.


References

Dearen, J. & Kunzelman, M. (2017, August 22) Deadly Shooting Ends Friendships Forged in Neo-Nazi Group

Krugman, P. (2021, June 28). "What Underlies the G.O.P. Commitment to                                       Ignorance? New York Times. 

Kutner, M. (2020). Radicalized. Audible originals.

Texas Education Agency (2020). Enrollment in Texas Pubic Schools                                      https://tea.texas.gov/sites/default/files/enroll_2019-20.pdf




Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D. Department of Educational Leadership and Policy; Director, Texas Center for Education Policy, University of Texas at Austin; and blogger since 2004.

"Texas needs a rebranding away from racially charged myths," by Chris Tomlinson

Back in 2019, Chris Tomlinson, Houston Chronicle Staff Writer and co-author with Bryan Burrough and Jason Stanford of just published book, "Forget the Alamo: The Rise and Fall of an American Myth," makes it abundantly clear for people who may not read or know history or in the more common situation, were taught the wrong history, Texas needs to seriously look at its false brand and how distorted and harmful it is.

Not that historians haven't been regularly exposing the ugly truth of Texians' struggle for freedom to enslave others, but rather that this triumphalist myth of the American West may finally be in decline. This precise de-centering of whiteness is why we see this political frenzy to eliminate not just critical thought, but also to defend whitewashed versions of Texas and U.S. history, as well.

Once one learns the truth of Texas history, including slavery, genocidal campaigns, and wars of aggression against Mexicans and Native Americans, our mythic source of pride is appropriately tarnished. Admittedly, changing one's suppositions is no small thing. Yet still more corrosive is the wish to indoctrinate everyone based on the alleged supremacy of white people.

As we commence this week with Texas' special legislative session, we must push back against any proposal that would limit our youths' access to these dark corners of history that our state has occluded for much too long.

Do treat yourself to Tomlinson's interview on MSNBC with Joy Reid yesterday in "ReidOut."

-Angela Valenzuela

Texas needs a rebranding away from racially charged myths

Chris Tomlinson | Staff Writer | Houston Chronicle
April 10, 2019

Bob Owen, Staff-photographer / San Antonio Express-News


Every time I visit the Alamo or see Houstonians don cowboy garb for “Go Texan Day,” I wonder how much longer the long-tall Texan schtick of blazing guns, big hats, high boots and ethnic warfare will work as a state brand.

The adoption of the Western identity, after all, was an intentional rebranding of the state. In my book about my family’s five generations in Texas, "Tomlinson Hill," I describe how state leaders wanted to slough off the Southern, white supremacist identity that dominated until the 1940s when state leaders made Big Tex the new icon.

As Americans reassess our creation myths and tear down Confederate statues, Texans must also rethink our “national” brand. 

Should San Antonio spend $450 million to make the Battle of the Alamo its centerpiece? The whites who died were defending slavery as much as fighting for liberty. The Spanish mission has a 300-year history, so why should all the emphasis focus on 13 days that ended with a massacre that wasn’t much of a battle?

Does anyone still think the Texas Rangers’ genocide against Native Americans or massacres of Hispanics are things to take pride in? Cowboys are such a small part of Texas history. Dressing up as a slave overseer or a sharecropper would be a more honest statement about our economic history on the Houston Rodeo’s “Go Texan Day.”

Chris Tomlinson writes commentary about business, economics and policy.

chris.tomlinson@chron.com

twitter.com/cltomlinson