EDITORIAL
At this year’s West Texas Legislative Summit, there’s plenty to be optimistic about when looking into the economic future of the region: namely, the Iran war, and data centers.
Let me clarify: the panelist in question — Jesse Thompson, a senior economist from the Dallas Federal Reserve — only referenced “the current geopolitical situation” — a term I am now hearing more and more often to refer to a shooting war that’s killed 18 American soldiers, according to the Pentagon.
A war in which 3,600 Iranians have been killed as well, according to the UN.
He mentioned the “situation” is helpful for West Texas oil prices, although a lot of thinking is going into the “making money” side of that equation, and not so much the “high cost of everything being passed on to the already underpaid consumer” part.
The war has also been terrifically expensive, draining long built-up military stockpiles.
After all, it was Pres. Donald Trump who recently said America really can’t afford to pay for Medicare, or Medicaid, and Social Security going forward.
We have too many wars to fight.
The president also said recently that people who are critical towards development of hyperscale data centers in their communities are “dumb,” — which by my calculation would make most of the county commissioners in the area “dumb” as well, and a good three-quarters of the voters I’ve heard from in the last six months for that matter.
It’s good that everybody is on the same page going into this election year, as many of the topics up for debate have made much of the political base around the country positively outraged.
From rural Republicans criticizing private property rights, if the private property owners happen to be data centers; to Democrats opposing the overreach of a unitary executive, it seems like everybody in the common discourse has gone “Freaky Friday” politically.
Well, rest assured: the people who are the actual decision makers — the ones with actual power — are all on the same page.
Whole Lotta Not Talking About Legislation
After Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows was talking for a while, I realized that in the space of 60 seconds he managed to say that what was good for business was good for Texas, and what was good for Texas was good for us, in various combinations until I thought: “Does Speaker Burrows realize that we all know we’re in Texas right now? He seems intent on reminding us about exactly how much we’re in Texas.”
I probably got myself into trouble thinking this going in, I just assumed that the West Texas Legislative Summit would be more discussion of legislation, and less people talking in vagaries about unleashing Texas’ energy, and removing whatever burdensome regulations still remain.
In fact, our own legislators, Sen. Charles Perry and Rep. Drew Darby, said very little of their own positions other than their commitment to continue the work they’re already doing.
Grow or Die
Events like this are very important for San Angelo, which, like-it-or-not, is one more American city in the “grow or die” phase of existence. It must grow, economically, for it to continue. More housing, more jobs, more tax revenues.
Now, whether or not the natural resources needed to sustain that growth exists is for the fates to decide.
We are, after all, an oasis in the desert.
I am a bit of a nerd for parliamentary stuff, and was expecting a bit more…I don’t know, talking about legislation perhaps?
Going into this, I was hoping for a lot of juicy quotes, like any reporter, about campaign year promises or reflections on political matters. That was probably a little naive of me.
Before I go on, I should admit I am being a little duplicitous. There was discussion of legislative action.
If I had to give you the ten-peso version of the event, its that: business has never been better, and the legislators are going to take a step back and make sure that business can do whatever they want.
And thats fine. After all, if it was up to people like me, we’d stop any wars of foreign aggression and make sure we fund any water focused public works.
Public v. Private
But of course, public works had little to do with the discussion at the summit.
The state would like it very much if private companies did all that. Then it wouldn’t cost the taxpayers a dime!
Of course, then the taxpayers would also have no say in the administration of those works. Thats the flip-side of the privatization coin. And that’s ultimately the goal.
It seems to me that the legislators are determined to get rid of all taxes, that way the people have no stake in the affairs of the state, which can then just be handed off to people who care only about profit.
I can’t compare it to past events, but this year’s panels featured 16 guests from the private sector; and aside from Sen. Charles Perry and Rep. Drew Darby who played moderating roles during the proceedings, I count nine panelists from the public sector. Almost outnumbered, 2:1.
Why would I expect the West Texas Legislative Summit to be concerned with the needs of working-class people in my district? I mean, after all, the legislators are not particularly interested in addressing those needs when they’re at work in the first place.
Why would they make an exception in this arrangement?
I’ve heard from people that have talked to their legislators about data centers, expressing their worries about the rapid economic expansion leaving working people and seniors on fixed incomes far behind the in the dust, and they told me about how the legislators really seemed to really care about their concerns. And how they expressed a need to make decisions on regulations soon.
I felt ready to believe them, but wanted to see what they told the West Texas Legislative Summit first.
Well, here’s what they’re telling the important people: let er’ rip! Everything old is new again, it’s an election year. One more just like before.
Of course, with all this economic expansion came the added caveat: “we’re gonna figure the water and power thing out real soon, but don’t let that kill a good venture.”
“Wow ‘Concho Observer,’ thanks for blowing the lid off that one!”
Sarcasms aside, it was naive of me to assume that a room full of the most important people in the region would care about talking about any kind of social welfare or public works. We don’t do that in Texas.
The Other San Angelo
There are two San Angelos. You can see them in perfect view at the summit.
The first, the more important, the money and decision makers, are seated all around.
And the other San Angelo can be seen serving lunch outside, clearing off the tables after lunch service, chastised for setting plates down too loudly.
I was reminded of my catering days watching the affair, especially when standing beside the door after the lunch service was served, I watched an older employee who was clearing plates off the tables, get lightly cursed for setting them down on the trays too loudly — making too much noise — while Sen. Perry was still introducing guests.
A harsh shush, and the woman turned around and walked past me with an expression that conveyed it wasn’t the first time she got yelled at today.
A Protest
Across town, the night before the summit, outside the opening soiree, a few dozen protestors assembled outside the Cactus Hotel, opposing data center production.
They chanted and cheered with the vigor of people who feel like their livelihoods are at stake. They feel that — in the quest for big deals — they are likely to be left behind.
To deny that this would happen if San Angelo became the next big tech city of the West Texas would be wishful thinking. The truth about these kinds of economic situations is that somebody always gets left behind for the vultures.
Sometimes, it feels like you live in two different towns at the same time.
