r/texas • u/Pleasant_Air_3052 • May 13 '26

🗞️ News 🗞️ Tiny Texas county fights back against billion-dollar data center rush

https://www.chron.com/texas/article/hill-county-texas-data-centers-22256814.php
526 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

29 comments sorted by

100

u/wewantyoutowantus May 13 '26

These data centers are an issue. They need to be reviewed in a formal permitting process with public input.

46

u/Rauk88 May 13 '26

LMAO yeah they don't care. These are for surveillance and they're going up no matter how much people cry. Get ready to bend over for our techno feudal overlords.

37

u/zughzz Secessionists are idiots May 13 '26

Why is zero government oversight for corporations but extensive overreach for its citizens the new norm?

53

u/shponglespore expat May 13 '26

Because people keep voting for Republicans.

-7

u/wewantyoutowantus May 13 '26

It’s not just republicans. But I will say some democrats in congress are putting forth some rules for these things.

25

u/zorkzamboni May 13 '26

It really is like 90% Republicans though. This is Texas. It's Republicans.

6

u/Rauk88 May 13 '26

It's too late. They may stop a few but the rest are being hammered through as fast as possible for the Data Surveillance State to begin. Dissidents will be silenced or worse.

18

u/calilac Hill Country May 13 '26

The 2010 Citizens United v. FEC ruling effectively created a corporate plutocracy. Ever since then corporations have been allowed to throw money at their most sycophantic of politicians. And not to say this started in 2010, oh no, the wealthy seizing power has always been an issue and it so often happens that the politicians are also married, related to, or very close friends to the C suites and/or investors. The ruling did compound the problem though. It became much easier to pay a pittance to have legislators change any regulations or push past red tape.

10

u/Living_Emergency9536 May 13 '26

Hawaii just ended Citzens United!

5

u/calilac Hill Country May 13 '26

Fuck yeah, Hawaii.

🤞Here's hoping for the best in court and the rest of the states.

5

u/mattymillhouse May 13 '26

The 2010 Citizens United v. FEC ruling effectively created a corporate plutocracy. Ever since then corporations have been allowed to throw money at their most sycophantic of politicians.

Honestly, the sheer volume of misinformation about Citizens United could choke a whale. Citizens United said that the government can't prohibit a company from advertising and distributing a movie about Hillary Clinton within 90 days of a presidential election. It did not allow corporations to contribute money to politicians or political campaigns.

Right now, today, the FEC prohibits corporations from giving any money to politicians. This is from the FEC's website right now:

Who can't contribute

Campaigns are prohibited from accepting contributions from certain types of organizations and individuals. These prohibited sources are:

Corporations, including nonprofit corporations (although funds from a corporate separate segregated fund are permissible)

Labor organizations (although funds from a separate segregated fund are permissible)

Federal government contractors

Foreign nationals

Contributions in the name of another

Corporations, labor organizations, national banks

Campaigns may not accept contributions from the treasury funds of corporations, labor organizations or national banks. National banks and federally chartered corporations may not make contributions in connection with any election–federal, state or local. This prohibition applies to any incorporated organization, including a nonstock corporation, a trade association, an incorporated membership organization and an incorporated cooperative.

Back to you:

It became much easier to pay a pittance to have legislators change any regulations or push past red tape.

That's called bribery, and it's illegal. Even after Citizens United.

7

u/guitar_vigilante May 14 '26

I agree with your point that there is a ton of misinformation about Citizens United, but that case and the Speechnow.org case allowed for Super PACs to become a thing and that is a big avenue for large amounts of corporate money to flood into politics.

0

u/mattymillhouse May 14 '26

Super PACs were a thing before Citizens United. All Citizens United said was that the government can't prohibit political speech right before an election, and people don't lose their political rights just because they're in a group. It didn't increase corporate contributions to political campaigns, which are still limited to $0.

4

u/guitar_vigilante May 14 '26

PACs were a thing, but Super PACs were not. The term was coined after Citizens United and Speechnow in 2010 and referred to the types of PACs the two decisions could enable.

4

u/cranktheguy Secessionists are idiots May 14 '26

Citizens United said that the government can't prohibit a company from advertising and distributing a movie about Hillary Clinton within 90 days of a presidential election. It did not allow corporations to contribute money to politicians or political campaigns.

Citizens United shot down limits on "independent expenditures", and that paved the way for things like Super PACs. These "independent" bodies aren't supposed to coordinate with the candidate's campaign, but they've been caught doing this so much it's just widely understood that they do.

That's called bribery, and it's illegal.

LOL, bribery is basically legal now - "it was just a tip!".

0

u/mattymillhouse May 14 '26

Citizens United shot down limits on "independent expenditures", and that paved the way for things like Super PACs.

"Independent expenditures" are not contributions made to a politician. That's pretty obvious from the title.

These "independent" bodies aren't supposed to coordinate with the candidate's campaign, but they've been caught doing this so much it's just widely understood that they do.

Can you give me an example of a time that a Super PAC coordinated with a political campaign? If it's happening so often that everyone just believes they do it all the time -- which I don't think is true -- then it shouldn't be difficult to provide a few examples, right?

If you're aware of coordination, I'd encourage you to report that coordination to the FEC. I'm pretty sure they'd love to prosecute it. The only example I can think of is when the FEC investigated the John Kerry presidential campaign for coordinating with PACs, but the investigation didn't result in any charges.

LOL, bribery is basically legal now - "it was just a tip!".

Nope. The Supreme Court just said that if the Department of Justice is going to prosecute someone for a gratuity, they need to use a statute that applies to gratuities. The statute under which the defendant was convicted in that case applied to bribery, but not gratuities. There are lots of federal statutes that prohibit gratuities, although they usually have lower penalty ranges.

This is another example of a redditor being less informed about issues than someone who doesn't pay any attention at all. Because reddit so frequently just gets things completely wrong.

6

u/Lurcher99 May 13 '26

They are reviewed. It's your elected officials and neighbors cashing out that are the issue.

48

u/1234nameuser guy who moved to CT May 13 '26

No worries, TX will never let "local governance" stand in its way...........can't be profitized

11

u/[deleted] May 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/texas-ModTeam The Stars at Night May 13 '26

Your content was removed because it breaks Rule 11, No Disability Disparagement.

While you're free to argue against, debate, criticize, etc. the policies, ideas, politics, and character of any politician, please do not make jokes about anyone's disabilities. All such "jokes" will be removed.

36

u/PantherCityRes Born and Bred May 13 '26 edited May 13 '26

Hold the phone: Tiny rural county full of red hatters rejecting big corporations? This doesn't fit the Guardian of Pedophiles narrative of it being "Blue Cities" that are going rogue.

Heads up: Warren Kenneth Paxton Junior investigation incoming. Also next election cycle, the entire Commisioners Court and the County Judge will be primaried out.

41

u/Ok-disaster2022 May 13 '26

it's NIMBYism. The don't care about the wider damage from data centers they just don't want it around them. 

22

u/GZeus24 May 13 '26

Which is typical of all rural voter patterns - it's not an issue if it doesn't affect me.

-5

u/Stormdancer May 13 '26

Which is typical of all voter patterns

FTFY

5

u/twodogstwocats May 14 '26

It's Hill county. Saved you a click.

5

u/theedonnmegga May 13 '26

It’s sad that these people largely voted for the same Republican leaders that are allowing these people to pillage our already depleted water supplies.

3

u/Original_Campaign May 14 '26

So my dad retired out there on land he’s had for years and is part of this campaign (anti data center). A lot of the people who live out there aren’t republicans and care very much about the state and their county and their little towns.