When Conservatives Abandon Free Enterprise

The debate over data centers in Texas is revealing something uncomfortable about the modern “conservative” movement: Too many conservatives are willing to defend free enterprise in theory, but abandon it the moment a specific project becomes unpopular.

That is what makes the current data center debate so important.

This is NOT because every data center project deserves support. It does NOT.

Data centers should NOT receive taxpayer subsidies. They should NOT receive special tax abatements. They should NOT shift infrastructure costs onto taxpayers or ratepayers. They should NOT be insulated from legitimate scrutiny over electricity demand, water use, road impacts, or harm to neighboring property owners.

On those points, conservatives should be firm.

Corporate welfare is NOT free enterprise.

Secretive development deals are NOT free enterprise.

Socializing private costs is NOT free enterprise.

But neither are political vetoes, regional planning commissions, broad local control schemes, or new government barriers aimed at stopping lawful private investment.

That is where some conservatives are losing the plot.

The #1836Project, promoted by the Grayson County Conservatives, is a useful example. It raises several concerns that deserve to be taken seriously, including tax abatements, grid strain, water demand, cost shifting, and local frustration over large-scale data center development.

Those are fair concerns.

But the proposed direction also reveals a deeper philosophical problem.

If the answer to data centers is countywide voter approval, regional planning bodies, expanded local authority, annexation tools, and more government power over private investment, then conservatives are no longer defending free enterprise. They are simply arguing over which level of government gets to control the market. That is not a small distinction.

Free enterprise does NOT mean every business gets a subsidy.

Free enterprise does NOT mean developers get to impose costs on others.

Free enterprise does NOT mean neighboring property owners have no rights.

But free enterprise also does NOT mean private investment must survive a popularity contest before it can proceed.

A countywide vote over whether a lawful private project may be built is not just “local control.” It is a political veto over private property.

A Chapter 391 regional planning commission may be described as coordination, but if it becomes a tool to pressure, delay, or block development, it is NOT limited government.

It is planning, and planning is not made conservative simply because it is local.

This is the trap.

Many conservatives instinctively distrust Washington. They often distrust Austin. But when government power is exercised by a county, city, special district, or regional commission, they sometimes treat it as though it is no longer government power at all.

That is wrong.

Local government is still government.

A city council can violate property rights.

A county commission can distort markets.

A regional planning body can block competition.

A political majority can trample individual liberty just as surely at the local level as at the state or federal level.

Conservatives should understand this better than anyone.

The question is not merely whether power is centralized or decentralized. The question is whether government power is being limited, and whether individual liberty, private property, free enterprise, personal responsibility, and market competition are being protected.

On data centers, that test should be easy…

If a company wants corporate welfare, say no.

If a company wants taxpayers to pay for its infrastructure, say no.

If a company wants special treatment from government, say no.

If a company causes actual harm to neighboring property owners, provide a remedy.

If a company imposes costs on the grid or local infrastructure, make the company pay its way.

But if a company buys land, follows the law, pays its own costs, respects property rights, and operates without special favors, conservatives should be very careful about demanding more government power to stop it.

That is not a defense of data centers as an industry. It is a defense of the principle.

Free enterprise cannot only apply to businesses conservatives like.

Property rights cannot only apply to land uses that receive majority approval.

Limited government cannot only mean limiting the governments we dislike.

If conservatives abandon those principles whenever an industry becomes controversial, then they are not defending liberty. They ARE PRACTICING SELECTIVE STATISM.

That is the danger in the current data center debate.

Some conservatives are so frustrated by legitimate problems, including subsidies, secrecy, cost shifting, and poor infrastructure planning, that they are reaching for solutions that undermine the very principles they claim to defend.

The right response to corporate welfare is NOT local obstruction.

The right response to cost shifting is NOT a political veto.

The right response to infrastructure strain is NOT anti-growth panic.

The right response is to apply conservative principles consistently.

No subsidies. No special favors. No hidden costs. No cost shifting. No political vetoes. No regional planning gatekeepers. Protect property rights. Make developers pay their own way. Build the energy and water infrastructure growth requires.

Let markets work.

The 1836 Project is right to point out that bad data center policy exists, but conservatives should NOT answer bad policy with more government control.

Data centers are not the real test.

Free enterprise is.