While HCR 77 does not impose direct costs on the state budget, it carries significant indirect fiscal implications for Texas, particularly in the Rio Grande Valley's agricultural sector and municipal water supply systems. If successful in prompting federal action or improved compliance from Mexico, the resolution could help mitigate economic losses due to water shortages, leading to long-term financial benefits for the state.
One major area of impact is agriculture, where reliable access to Rio Grande water is crucial for crop production. Over the past decade, Mexico's failure to deliver its treaty-obligated water has contributed to crop failures, reduced planting acreage, and economic instability in farming communities. If Mexico adheres to its obligations, Texas farmers could experience higher crop yields, which would translate into increased sales tax revenue and job stability in rural areas. A more predictable water supply would also reduce the risk of business closures in agriculture-dependent industries, such as food processing and transportation.
Additionally, Texas has previously allocated state funds for emergency drought relief programs when treaty noncompliance has exacerbated water shortages. If HCR 77 leads to improved enforcement of the 1944 treaty, Texas could reduce its need for costly state-funded drought relief efforts. This could free up public funds for other infrastructure or economic development initiatives. Moreover, municipalities that depend on Rio Grande water—such as those in the Lower Rio Grande Valley—could avoid increased water treatment costs, emergency rationing measures, and potential infrastructure overhauls required to supplement dwindling water supplies.
Beyond agriculture and municipal needs, ensuring treaty compliance would bolster economic stability across multiple sectors, including real estate, manufacturing, and local businesses that rely on a steady water supply. A more predictable water flow would help sustain housing development and commercial expansion, preventing economic stagnation in water-stressed areas. While Texas may need to engage in ongoing lobbying efforts at the federal level to push for enforcement, the potential economic gains far outweigh these minimal advocacy costs.
In summary, HCR 77 has the potential to protect Texas’s economic interests, prevent future emergency expenditures, and create long-term fiscal stability by addressing a persistent water security issue. If successful, it could relieve financial pressure on farmers, businesses, and local governments while enhancing state tax revenues through economic recovery in affected regions.
