Crenshaw, Litton differ on details for flood control
More than a year ago, Hurricane Harvey dumped 1 trillion gallons of water on Harris County in four days, flooding thousands of homes in the watershed-heavy 2nd Congressional District.
With Harvey fresh on residents’ minds, recovery and flood control have emerged as top issues in the race to represent the district, which includes hard-hit areas such as Spring and Kingwood.
Flooding also is the topic on which Republican Dan Crenshaw and Democrat Todd Litton have found the most common ground as they vie to replace U.S. Rep. Ted Poe. The Humble Republican is not seeking reelection.
Crenshaw and Litton are at odds on most topics, revealing differences during a pair of recent debates on gun laws, immigration and health care. At a forum hosted last week by the nonprofit advocacy group Residents Against Flooding, and in separate interviews on flooding, however, they had few policy dissents, instead differing in style and priorities.
The sharpest difference appears to be their respective ap-
Dan Crenshaw sees a key part of his role as pressuring the Army Corps to hasten upgrades on the Addicks and Barker reservoirs and its study of a potential third reservoir … in part by saying he would target committee assignments in Congress that would deal with flooding and give him “oversight and authority” over the Army Corps.
Todd Litton’s plan omits the agency entirely and involves greater emphasis on “local leaders and people in the community” — and the idea of lifting the congressional ban on earmarks in a way that only allows for “specific, targeted” spending, which Litton says would speed up the flow of funds to flood projects.
proaches to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the federal agency that operates the Addicks and Barker dams and reservoirs. The Army Corps oversees scores of flood studies and projects nationally, including some announced earlier this year in Harris County.
Crenshaw, a former Navy SEAL, sees a key part of his role as pressuring the Army Corps to hasten upgrades on the Addicks and Barker reservoirs and its study of a potential third reservoir.
“If we actually dedicate some effort to it and put some pressure on the right people, I think you can speed these things up without forfeiting quality,” Crenshaw said. “I have a lot of experience with the Army. It doesn’t matter whether they’re engineers or whether they’re in Afghanistan. I come from a social operations background where we specialize in breaking down barriers and getting the job done.”
At the flooding forum, Crenshaw answered the opening question — “What is your bigpicture strategy for solving flooding in the Houston region?” — in part by saying he would target committee assignments in Congress that would deal with flooding and give him “oversight and authority” over the Army Corps.
“It means, tell me exactly why you can’t get this done in less than three years,” Crenshaw said. “And they’ll give me a set of reasons, and I’ll say, got it, let’s break down all those things.”
Litton, the former director of an education nonprofit, is skeptical that Crenshaw could exert enough pressure on the agency to make much of a difference.
“That doesn’t make any sense,” Litton said. “Because that’s where this stuff gets bogged down. We need to work in a more targeted, specific fashion that meets the local needs of our community.”
While Crenshaw’s flood plan mentions the Army Corps frequently, the summary of Litton’s plan omits the agency entirely. His workaround involves greater emphasis on “local leaders and people in the community” — and the idea of lifting the congressional ban on earmarks in a way that only allows for “specific, targeted” spending, which Litton says would speed up the flow of funds to flood projects.
“Nobody wants a bridge to nowhere,” Litton said, a reference to the infamous Alaska project that played a role in ending earmarks. “What we have right now is Congress drawing up these massive bills to fund the Army Corps of Engineers. … And then the Army Corps of Engineers has got to go figure it all out, and everybody is competing for the funding.”
The earmark idea has drawn bipartisan support, with Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, previously co-sponsoring an amendment that would bring back the practice but require more transparency while barring funds from being used for recreational facilities. Houston Democratic Reps. Al Green and Gene Green backed the proposal. Meanwhile, some Democrats have signaled they would like to revive earmarks if they gain control of the House. The move likely would take power from federal agencies, including the Army Corps, which have gained sway without Congress earmarking projects.
Crenshaw strongly advocates for local control, reserving a tab on his website for “Federalism & the 10th Amendment.” He also consulted with the Harris County Flood Control District about what may be missing from the Army Corps’ list of approved projects earlier this year.
Regarding the administrative challenge posed by the Army Corps, Crenshaw said, “Bureaucrats will stick to their procedure. … It’s my job to break down whatever barriers are in front of them so that they can do their job a little bit better.”
Otherwise, both candidates’ flood plans have a lot of crossover. The next congressman from Texas’ 2nd District will support dredging the West and East forks of the San Jacinto River, improving the emergency warning system, increasing detention throughout the district and at least exploring the idea of creating a new authority — or multiple watershed districts, as Litton floats in his plan — to improve regional coordination.
Litton and Crenshaw also have gotten behind the idea of a third reservoir, but each acknowledges unsettled questions such as location and design. They also both support efforts to develop a coastal spine, otherwise known at the “Ike Dike,” to protect the Port of Houston.
Asked about his flood control disagreements with Litton, Crenshaw jabbed at his opponent for releasing his flood plan in September, months after Crenshaw’s went up. Flooding was a key topic in Crenshaw’s heated Republican primary.
“This is the No. 1 (issue), and he’s got a pretty weak position on it,” Crenshaw said before Litton had released his plan.
Litton said he’s been talking with experts and residents about flooding throughout the campaign, and considers himself well-versed in flood policy and its effects, having lived in the district since the days of Tropical Storm Allison.
“My plan, by the way, will continue to change,” Litton said. “It’s a matter of making sure we’re connecting with people all over this district rather than trying to crank something out.”
Litton and Crenshaw agree climate change is real, but disagree over the extent to which human activity is creating more intense storms.
“I just think there’s a very reasonable debate going on, on exactly what human activity does to climate change, whether it’s 100 percent or whether it’s 1 percent,” Crenshaw said. “Is there a percentage? Yeah, there probably is — certainly. But to attribute one weather event to it, and also there’s plenty of other studies that show we’re about average for the amount of hurricanes that we have in this country.”
Crenshaw said there simply is not enough data to have a “good indication” of the impact of climate change on storm intensity, and those who say otherwise are “cherrypicking.”
On his website, Litton calls for the U.S. to re-enter the Paris Agreement and advocates for seeking “innovative new solutions” in wind and solar energy.
In the section titled “global warming and climate change,” he writes: “The effects of global warming cannot be fully anticipated, but great swings in extreme or ‘weird’ weather seem to be the new normal.”
A study by the American Geophysical Union found global warming tripled the chances of Harvey’s record 51 inches of rainfall when comparing today’s climate to that of the 1880s.