Democrats Openly Declare Their Plans To Infiltrate Rural American Towns
Democrats might have a messaging problem, but they also have a ground game to render rural America irrelevant in elections.Democrats might have a messaging problem, but they also have a ground game to render rural America irrelevant in elections.Rural health is the next MAHA frontier
As a Virginia farmer, I have spent years fighting regulatory overreach and corporate consolidation that hollow out rural America.
So when Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) recently led the effort to remove a pesticide-liability shield from the House farm bill, rural families had reason to cheer.
If we are serious about children’s health in rural America, we should examine whether newer technologies can reduce toxic exposures.
The provision would have given pesticide manufacturers such as Bayer broad protection from “failure to warn” lawsuits brought by Americans who allege glyphosate caused their cancer. It also would have limited the ability of states and local communities to establish no-spray zones near schools and weakened protections for waterways.
In other words, it was top-down federal overreach and a corporate handout disguised as “regulatory uniformity.” It had no place in legislation meant to serve farmers and rural families.
Luna’s amendment passed 280-142, with more than 70 House Republicans joining all but six Democrats.
Republicans such as Luna deserve credit for refusing to grant blanket immunity to corporations at the expense of American families. They also showed that Make America Healthy Again can become a governing philosophy — one that puts children, families, and farmers ahead of well-connected industries.
More than three years after Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced his presidential campaign and later joined forces with President Donald Trump, the MAHA movement continues to secure policy victories with consequences that families may feel for decades.
The pesticide fight is only one part of a much larger question. Once policymakers begin examining preventable chemical exposures, the issue does not stop at the edge of the field.
Former Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.), a nurse and Tea Party leader, has noted that many of the same rural children whose schools and waterways Luna’s amendment would protect also spend hours each week riding older diesel school buses. Exposure to diesel exhaust has been linked to pediatric asthma, ADHD, and other health and developmental concerns.
If we are serious about children’s health in rural America, we should examine whether newer technologies can reduce those exposures.
That does not mean Washington should dictate transportation choices to rural districts. It means farmers and small-town families should have a seat at the table and access to resources when cleaner options, including electric school buses, become practical.
RELATED: Big Pharma’s miracle drugs have a nasty side effect
The American Lung Association projects more than $43,000 in health savings per electric bus through reductions in asthma attacks and respiratory illness. Electric buses are also substantially quieter than diesel models, which could benefit students with autism or sensory sensitivities.
Each community should weigh the costs and benefits for itself. But the issue deserves serious local consideration.
Rural water quality deserves the same attention.
A recent national analysis found that more than one in five Americans receive drinking water from systems with elevated nitrate levels associated with cancer and birth defects. Many of the hardest-hit communities are in agricultural regions.
Researchers and public health advocates have also raised concerns about PFAS “forever chemicals” contaminating farmland and groundwater, sometimes forcing farming operations to shut down.
Farmers understand better than anyone that stewardship has consequences. The land, water, and infrastructure we pass to the next generation will shape rural health long after today’s political battles are forgotten.
Reducing unnecessary exposures and modernizing aging infrastructure where it makes sense are practical, pro-family goals that fit squarely within the MAHA vision.
Luna and her colleagues showed that Congress can still deliver for rural American families when lawmakers put them ahead of corporate interests.
They should keep going.
The housing bill from hell targets red America
Preserving the continuity, vitality, and quality of life of exurban and rural red America should be a top priority for conservative policymakers.
Instead, red America faces a multifront assault on land use and development. Corrupt local Republican politicians and their developer donors are pushing data centers, solar and wind farms, and Section 8 housing for foreign labor. Now, Congress has sent President Trump a uniparty housing bill — the Obamacare of housing — that will open the floodgates for the federal government, globalists, and special interests to force more of that transformation on red communities.
Conservatives need communities that remain intact, counties that can govern themselves, and neighborhoods that are not remade by federal bribes and developer schemes.
After years of negotiations, Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.) just sent the largest housing bill in recent memory to the president’s desk. Only five Senate Republicans voted against it. Every Democrat supported it. Trump had signaled he would sign the bill — but only after Congress passes the SAVE America Act.
The bill is being sold as a magic wand to lower housing prices. In reality, it expands the Housing and Urban Development and Federal Housing Administration programs that helped fuel the housing bubble through artificial subsidies.
Conservatives are being told the bill bars corporate ownership of residential homes. But that provision was tacked on at the 11th hour, accounts for only 19 of the bill’s 381 pages, and is riddled with loopholes. Worse, the bill’s main provisions incentivize overdevelopment and Section 8 expansion in red America, negating whatever limited utility the corporate ownership provision might have.
The result is more social transformation than the partial corporate ownership ban claims to prevent.
Obama-style zoning incentives
Section 107 sets the tone by creating a federal zoning standard for “directing local reforms,” including “mechanisms to encourage adoption” of loose zoning rules — all in the name of increasing housing inventory. It also creates a national standard for developers and builders to request special zoning and appeal denials of variances.
That may sound appealing when discussing onerous regulations in blue states. But in red America, already overbuilt since COVID, this bill will create a federal standard that pressures communities to drop one of their few remaining tools of self-defense against the transformation of their neighborhoods.
The rest of the bill offers incentives to communities that follow this national standard. Inevitably, that will encourage localities to rezone not just for housing but also for other uses, including data centers.
HUD should not exist. It certainly should not dictate zoning policy to rural America.
The zoning guidelines would push communities to “reduce minimum lot sizes and setbacks,” increase the number of “duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes,” and promote “transit-oriented development.” Nothing good will come from federal incentives that effectively impose Section 8-style housing and density mandates on suburbs, exurbs, and rural towns.
RELATED: Another tax credit won’t fix what Sunday schools used to teach
Grant money as a weapon
Ask any conservative living in red America under RINO leadership — which describes much of America — and he will tell you that one of the greatest threats to the character of his county comes from developers working with corporatist GOP politicians, usually their donors, to transform the neighborhood through overdevelopment.
This bill does not directly mandate adoption of the zoning standards. It does something almost as dangerous: It offers local communities and developers incentives that will function like a mandate.
Section 207, written by pro-Hamas Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), creates new competitive HUD grants for states, localities, tribes, and other entities for planning, zoning reform, barrier reduction, and implementation to increase “affordable” housing supply.
Some grants will go toward reducing environmental barriers, which is how Warren got Republicans to support the bill. But much of the remaining criteria is rooted in urbanizing more of America.
The funds are contingent on adopting plans to rezone and “increase the availability of affordable housing and access to affordable housing.” In practice, this provision places a loaded gun to the head of communities that want to keep out Section 8. Nothing gets between local politicians and grant funds.
Section 208 goes further by granting funds to communities that have already demonstrated measurable progress in expanding housing supply at all costs. Eligibility criteria include localities that build more multiunit housing, reduce lot sizes, create “zoning overlays for mixed-income housing,” and use “local tax incentives or public financing for attainable housing.”
Want to densify your suburb and destroy single-family neighborhoods? This bill is for you.
Then comes the Community Development Block Grant program. Rather than following through on every Trump budget proposal’s promise to abolish this program, the bill expands it. Worse, it creates a zero-sum reallocation within the existing CDBG formula by shifting money from low-growth communities to high-growth communities.
Build more homes, and you get rewarded. Build fewer, and you get punished.
That will either shift more money to blue areas, which make up the lion’s share of places needing more inventory, or incentivize red areas to overdevelop.
Subsidizing the next bubble
No bad housing bill would be complete without provisions expanding the FHA’s authority to extend even more loans to people who cannot afford houses, thereby fueling the next housing bubble.
Section 213 allows the FHA to insure larger loans for apartment buildings, enabling more and bigger multifamily projects to be financed with FHA insurance.
Outside the Northeast, home prices are already beginning to tumble from COVID-era overbuilding, and builders are desperate to sell. In June, 35% of builders cut prices, while 62% used sales incentives to attract buyers. America does not need to expand HUD’s reach into local communities to incentivize what is already happening.
Ironically, this bill is being sold as a way to prevent corporations from transforming neighborhoods by purchasing too many homes. But almost every other provision accelerates an even greater transformation.
Section 1001 supposedly bans very large corporate investors from buying more single-family houses. But it carves out practical exceptions for new construction, build-to-rent developments, meaningful renovation programs, and certain pathways that help renters eventually buy homes.
In other words, the same corporations will enjoy even more subsidies to build Section 8 rentals in the suburbs under the bill’s extremely limited ban than they enjoyed before it.
RELATED: Home builders say immigration reform is essential to ease housing affordability crisis
No one is home
This is why Congress should not rush through a bill of this magnitude on the suspension calendar without debate.
Then again, nobody is home in the so-called conservative movement to flag a bill this large. Obamacare could pass overnight, and the loudest voices on the right might not even notice.
The bill’s supporters claim they are solving a housing crisis. In reality, they are giving HUD, developers, corporate investors, and local Republican sellouts more tools to transform red America.
Conservatives do need homes. They need communities that remain intact, counties that can govern themselves, and neighborhoods that are not remade by federal bribes and developer schemes.
That is the home conservatives must ultimately construct. Where is the bill to expedite that construction?
College towns bred the next plague on rural America: The fail-lib
Traditionally, one advantage of living in rural America was the ability to escape insufferable leftists. The trade-offs were obvious: fewer jobs, fewer restaurants, less entertainment, and fewer institutions built for upward mobility. But distance from liberal cultural centers meant the average community could preserve a sane, conservative, patriotic outlook — the kind of place where normal people could still breathe without asking permission from their urban cultural commissars.
That escape has narrowed. As media and universities became more radical, their disciples moved into rural America through government-mandated institutions like schools and libraries. Progressivism became harder to avoid no matter how far someone moved from the city. Thus the hicklib was born.
The fail-lib was promised luxury and elite influence. Now she serves people she despises while searching for any opportunity to make their lives worse.
The hicklib is usually a social outcast, a failson who needs a moral explanation for why he hates the community he never fit into. His resentment searches for a theory that will dignify his rage, and the progressive missionaries installed in local institutions are happy to provide one.
Teachers tell the hicklib his country is evil. His family and neighbors are racist, sexist, backward religious fanatics destroying the lives of minorities who do not even live in town. The white Christian culture that dominates rural America is primitive and responsible for the evils of the world. The hicklib’s failure to fit in becomes proof of moral superiority.
So the hicklib shows up at town council meetings in a Black Lives Matter shirt to denounce minority oppression in a community with no actual black people. That absence, naturally, becomes further proof of the town’s intolerance. He loudly organizes Pride events attended by two other hicklibs. The clique stages protests, distributes flyers, and imitates urban activist rituals.
By practicing the sacraments of their faith, they hope to summon the spirit of the age to judge their reactionary little town.
The hicklib has become one of rural America’s petty plagues. But as the value of college degrees collapses, a new breed is emerging: the fail-lib.
The fail-lib worked hard in high school and gave progressive teachers every approved answer. She wrote her college entrance essay on the oppression of transwomen of color in coal mining. On campus, she became an activist. She secured a degree in some woke humanities discipline and earned straight A’s by repeating everything her communist professors told her.
The path to success was laid out before the fail-lib was born. She followed it perfectly. All that remained was the cushy corporate HR job and her rightful place making ordinary people miserable.
Then the plan failed.
RELATED: Your enemies aren’t mentally ill. They apparently just want to kill you.
The college degree that cost $100,000 was supposed to guarantee success. The debt would be worth it because the credential would deliver a salary large enough for an apartment, a car, and monthly student loan payments. But the degree was not merely about financial security. It was also a symbol of status. College graduates were supposed to rule over the simple plebs who never left home.
The degree would confer wealth, power, and privilege. Instead, it turned out that too many people held degrees and too few jobs required them. Corporations began cutting HR departments that wasted resources and reduced productivity. Poor oppressed immigrant workers somehow found work while the fail-lib remained unemployed, though a good progressive would never complain. She could never explain how, but she knew the white Christian patriarchy was responsible for this injustice.
Earlier generations of college students had an insult for the ordinary residents of college towns: townies. The townie was contemptible because he was not merely passing through before collecting a credential and moving on to rule the world. He belonged to the place the student planned to use and abandon.
The arrogance required to insult the permanent residents of a community while you are a temporary visitor is staggering, but the slur was common. It revealed the sneering condescension of the would-be liberal elite. Now the tables have turned.
The college degree was once a ticket to the top. Now it is an expensive lottery ticket with worsening odds. More graduates emerge from extended stays in higher education with mountains of debt and few prospects.
The fail-lib spends a year unemployed, desperately seeking even the entry-level positions her fancy degree was supposed to let her bypass. After burning through savings and taking on more debt, she accepts a management job at the local Starbucks or retail outlet. If she gets lucky, she might run the local Apple Store.
The hicklib may be insufferable, but the fail-lib is worse. She was destined to leave the college town behind and move to a big liberal city like New York. She was supposed to be the person ordering lattes and $30 burrito bowls for important work lunches, not the person making them. Once, she mocked the parochial townies trapped in their backward existence. Now she is stuck among them with no escape.
RELATED: Almonds feed a people. AI feeds a machine.
The fail-lib is not merely trapped in the backwater town. She is poor and low-status. A management job at Target might provide a decent life in a small town where prices remain low, but the fail-lib has a mountain of student debt she can never repay on a retail wage.
Plumbers, cops, firefighters, and mechanics all seem to make more money and enjoy more status in the community. The fail-lib was promised luxury and elite influence. Now she serves people she despises while searching for any opportunity to make their lives worse.
Artificial intelligence will intensify the problem. The bureaucratic make-work jobs progressive college graduates once dominated are among the easiest to automate, consolidate, or eliminate. The bitter entitlement of a psychology major with $100,000 in debt helping you find the cereal aisle will become more common.
The fail-lib may make less money than you. She may be less respected than you. She may even be despised by the townies she once mocked. But in her heart, she knows she is superior.
Nothing could convince her otherwise.
And she will spit in your burrito just to remind you who was supposed to be in charge.
Virginia Democrats’ Power Grab Is A Giant Middle Finger To Rural Americans
Democrats often claim they want to win over rural voters. Yet when it comes to hiding their scorn for them, they’re hopelessly incontinent.Trump has delivered on rural health care
Rural health care in America faces a host of chronic challenges: high costs, limited access, and aging infrastructure. For millions of families across the heartland, these problems aren’t abstract — they determine whether patients can see a doctor, reach a hospital, or receive timely care close to home.
By expanding flexibility, encouraging innovation, and meeting rural communities where they are, policymakers have begun to confront the unique realities of rural health care.
More than 60 million Americans — nearly one in five — live in rural areas where patients routinely travel long distances only to find fewer doctors, hospitals, and clinics available to serve them.
Under-resourced communities face over-sized health challenges. Nowhere is this more evident than in rural America, where higher rates of chronic disease, premature mortality, and addiction persist compared to the rest of the country.
In recent months, the Trump administration and Congress have advanced a set of reforms — largely overlooked in the national debate — that directly address long-standing disparities and structural weaknesses in rural health care, and they could meaningfully strengthen care delivery in these communities, improve health, and save lives.
The most significant of these efforts is the Rural Health Transformation Program, established last year in President Trump and the Republican Congress’ signature One Big Beautiful Bill Act. This $50 billion program represents the largest investment ever dedicated specifically to rural health, far exceeding the scale of prior grant programs. States that receive awards can use these resources to modernize and stabilize their rural health systems.
The program allows states to invest in innovative care models tailored to rural realities — whether expanding outpatient capacity, strengthening the health care workforce, or upgrading aging facilities. Instead of imposing a one-size-fits-all approach, the program gives states the flexibility to design reforms that reflect local needs and constraints.
Although media attention has shifted elsewhere, the White House and congressional leaders should continue to emphasize the long-term importance of this investment. The program addresses a foundational weakness in America’s health system and delivers tangible support to rural communities that have too often been left behind.
As part of the recently enacted FY 2026 appropriations legislation, Congress also extended Medicare telehealth flexibilities through December 31, 2027, delaying a return to statutory barriers that once limited access to telehealth services. Telehealth allows patients to connect with specialists, receive mental health services, and manage chronic diseases without traveling hours for an appointment.
In communities facing persistent provider shortages, telehealth has become not a convenience but a lifeline — a bridge over miles of empty road, connecting rural patients to care that would otherwise remain out of reach.
The FY 2026 appropriations legislation also reauthorized the Acute Hospital Care at Home initiative, which allows eligible patients to receive hospital-level care in their own homes. This approach reduces costs, eases pressure on rural hospitals with limited capacity, and improves patient satisfaction. For small hospitals struggling to keep beds staffed and doors open, Acute Hospital Care at Home offers a practical way to deliver high-quality care while preserving local access.
RELATED: Trump’s economic numbers look good so far, but you wouldn’t know from reading the news
Finally, although Congress has not yet enacted it into law, lawmakers are working to reauthorize the Rural Health Care Services Outreach Program. This program supports community-based efforts to expand access to care, strengthen coordination among providers, and address persistent service gaps. Its grants help rural health systems collaborate across institutions and tailor solutions for populations that too often fall through the cracks.
Taken together, these reforms do not promise a quick cure — but they do offer a realistic treatment plan. They don’t strengthen rural health care because it’s easy; they make it easier because rural health care must be strong. While these efforts will not eliminate every challenge rural communities face, they are designed to deliver tangible improvements that deserve recognition.
By expanding flexibility, encouraging innovation, and meeting rural communities where they are, policymakers have begun to confront the unique realities of rural health care. Yet as the news cycle moves on, these achievements risk being overlooked. Policymakers in both Congress and the executive branch should resist the urge to rush to the next challenge and instead highlight the significance of these steps in the right direction.
Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearHealth and made available via RealClearWire.
Your laptop is about to become a casualty of the AI grift
Welcome to the techno-feudal state, where citizens are forced to underwrite unnecessary and harmful technology at the expense of the technology they actually need.
The economic story of 2025 is the government-driven build-out of hyperscale AI data centers — sold as innovation, justified as national strategy, and pursued in service of cloud-based chatbot slop and expanded surveillance. This build-out is consuming land, food, water, and energy at enormous scale. As Energy Secretary Chris Wright bluntly put it, “It takes massive amounts of electricity to generate intelligence. The more energy invested, the more intelligence produced.”
Shortages will hit consumers hard in the coming year.
That framing ignores what is being sacrificed — and distorted — in the process.
Beyond the destruction of rural communities and the strain placed on national energy capacity, government favoritism toward AI infrastructure is warping markets. Capital that once sustained the hardware and software ecosystem of the digital economy is being siphoned into subsidized “AI factories,” chasing artificial general intelligence instead of cheaper, more efficient investments in narrow AI.
Thanks to fiscal, monetary, tax, and regulatory favoritism, the result is free chatbot slop and an increasingly scarce, expensive supply of laptops, phones, and consumer hardware.
Subsidies break the market
For decades, consumer electronics stood as one of the greatest deflationary success stories in modern economics. Unlike health care or education — both heavily monopolized by government — the computer industry operated with relatively little distortion. From December 1997 to August 2015, the CPI for “personal computers and peripheral equipment” fell 96%. Over that same period, medical care, housing, and food costs rose between 80% and 200%.
That era is ending.
AI data centers are now crowding out consumer electronics. Major manufacturers such as Dell and Samsung are scaling back or discontinuing entire product lines because they can no longer secure components diverted to AI chip production.
Prices for phones and laptops are rising sharply. Jobs tied to consumer electronics — especially the remaining U.S.-based assembly operations — are being squeezed out in favor of data center hardware that benefits a narrow set of firms.
This is policy-driven distortion, not organic market evolution.
Through initiatives like Stargate and hundreds of billions in capital pushed toward data center expansion, the government has created incentives for companies to abandon consumer hardware in favor of AI infrastructure. The result is shortages that will hit consumers hard in the coming year.
Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron are retooling factories to prioritize AI-grade silicon for data centers instead of personal devices. DRAM production is being routed almost entirely toward servers because it is far more profitable to leverage $40,000 AI chips than $500-$800 laptops. In the fourth quarter of 2025, contract prices for certain 16GB DDR5 chips rose nearly 300% as supply was diverted. Dell and Lenovo have already imposed 15%-30% price hikes on PCs, citing insatiable AI-sector demand.
The chip crunch
The situation is deteriorating quickly. DRAM inventory levels are down 80% year over year, with just three weeks of supply on hand — down from 9.5 weeks in July. SK Hynix expects shortages to persist through late 2027. Samsung has announced it is effectively out of inventory and has more than doubled DDR5 contract prices to roughly $19-$20 per unit. DDR5 is now standard across new consumer and commercial desktops and laptops, including Apple MacBooks.
Samsung has also signaled it may exit the SSD market altogether, deeming it insufficiently glamorous compared with subsidized data center investments. Nvidia has warned it may cut RTX 50 series production by up to 40%, a move that would drive up the cost of entry-level gaming systems.
Shrinkflation is next. Before the data center bubble, the market was approaching a baseline of 16GB of RAM and 1TB SSDs for entry-level laptops. As memory is diverted to enterprise customers, manufacturers will revert to 8GB systems with slower storage to keep prices under $999 — ironically rendering those machines incapable of running the very AI applications they’re working on.
Real innovation sidelined
The damage extends beyond prices. Research and development in conventional computing are already suffering. Investment in efficient CPUs, affordable networking equipment, edge computing, and quantum-adjacent technologies has slowed as capital and talent are pulled into AI accelerators.
This is precisely backward. Narrow AI — focused on real-world tasks like logistics, agriculture, port management, and manufacturing — is where genuine productivity gains lie. China understands this and is investing accordingly. The United States is not. Instead, firms like Roomba, which experimented with practical autonomy, are collapsing — only to be acquired by the Chinese!
This is not a free market. Between tax incentives, regulatory favoritism, land-use carve-outs, capital subsidies, and artificially suppressed interest rates, the government has created an arms race for a data center bubble China itself is not pursuing. Each round of monetary easing inflates the same firms’ valuations, enabling further speculative investment divorced from consumer need.
RELATED: China’s AI strategy could turn Americans into data mines
Hype over utility
As Charles Hugh Smith recently noted, expanding credit boosts asset prices, which then serve as collateral for still more leverage — allowing capital-rich firms to outbid everyone else while hollowing out the broader economy.
The pattern is familiar. Consider the Ford plant in Glendale, Kentucky, where 1,600 workers were laid off after the collapse of government-favored electric vehicle investments. That facility is now being retooled to produce batteries for data centers. When one subsidy collapses, another replaces it.
We are trading convention for speculation. Conventional technology — reliable hardware, the internet, mobile computing — delivers proven, measurable utility. The current investment surge into artificial general intelligence is based on hypothetical future returns propped up by state power.
The good old laptop is becoming collateral damage in what may prove to be the largest government-induced tech bubble yet.
The hidden hospital scam driving up drug prices, coming to a state near you
Kansas lawmakers are debating whether to expand health care providers’ access to the federal 340B drug pricing program. If passed, Senate Bill 284 would hand even more power to large hospital chains while shrinking consumer choice. It would also deepen the program’s existing problems — lack of accountability, rising costs, and market consolidation — all without helping the patients it was supposed to serve.
The 340B program, created in 1992, was meant to help safety-net providers serving uninsured and low-income patients by requiring drug manufacturers to sell medications at steep discounts. Today, it has ballooned into the second-largest prescription drug purchasing program in the United States, behind only Medicare Part D, costing $66.3 billion in 2023.
The 340B program no longer fulfills its stated purpose. It fuels industry consolidation, drives up costs, and reduces access to care — especially in rural communities.
SB 284 would make that worse. The bill would block drugmakers from denying access to certain drugs, reduce transparency, and discourage innovation. It would do nothing to stop hospitals from exploiting the program. Instead, it would encourage them to expand the same practices that drive up costs for Kansans, small businesses, and rural health care providers.
The 340B shell game
The myth behind 340B is that big health systems use their windfalls to support rural hospitals. The reality is the opposite. As 340B has expanded, rural hospitals have closed by the dozens. The law’s original purpose — to subsidize drug purchases for clinics that serve the needy — has been lost.
What began as a narrow, temporary safety net for vulnerable populations has evolved into a profit engine for massive hospital systems. Many 340B participants today are large urban hospitals, cancer centers, and wealthy institutions that do little charity care. Once a hospital buys an outpatient clinic, it can immediately declare that clinic 340B-eligible, regardless of the patients it serves. Those discounted drugs can then be billed at full price to insurers or government programs, and the hospital keeps the difference.
Federal watchdogs, including the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Inspector General, have repeatedly documented the program’s lack of oversight. Hospitals aren’t required to report how they use 340B revenue or whether they pass savings on to patients.
The rich get richer
Hospitals buy drugs cheap, bill high, and pocket the profits. Those profits fund expansion — not lower costs for patients. The lure of easy money drives hospital consolidation across the country. Smaller, independent clinics — often more efficient and affordable — can’t compete with heavily subsidized giants and are forced to sell out.
This pattern has repeated hundreds of times nationwide, inflating 340B spending and diverting subsidies far from the low-income patients the program was meant to help. Since 2014, when 340B abuse accelerated alongside the Affordable Care Act, nonprofit hospitals have gone on a buying spree, snapping up local clinics, raising prices, and squeezing out independent providers.
Each participating hospital can also contract with hundreds of retail pharmacies, creating sprawling networks that capture 340B discounts far removed from any needy patient. The result is “mission creep” on a massive scale — a program once justified by compassion now serves as a revenue stream for billion-dollar systems.
Instead of cutting costs, 340B creates a hidden subsidy that enriches institutions while obscuring the real price of care. Worse, some hospitals use their freed-up funds to expand abortion and gender-transition services, sidestepping Hyde Amendment restrictions on federal money for those procedures.
RELATED: Dr. Oz exposes the nonprofit lie at the heart of US health care
A program beyond saving
The 340B program no longer fulfills its stated purpose. It fuels industry consolidation, drives up costs, and reduces access to care — especially in rural communities. Expanding it in Kansas would cement a broken system, trapping the state in a cycle that benefits hospitals and harms taxpayers.
Congress and the Trump administration are working to reform 340B and Medicare to curb waste and corruption. Kansas lawmakers should follow that lead. Instead of handing big hospital chains another windfall, they should restore accountability, competition, and transparency — so that health care serves patients, not institutions.
AI isn’t feeding you
Mason County, Kentucky, sits just an hour from Cincinnati but feels like another world. Its beautiful rolling hills, deep farming roots, and traditions make it a bastion of conservative culture. Trump carried the county by 44 points. Residents distrust globalism, Big Tech, and government collusion.
Yet Mason has become the latest target for one of the largest data centers in the world. The company behind it hides its name, cloaks officials in nondisclosure agreements, and dangles cash at landowners while refusing to reveal how it will feed the massive hunger for power and water.
The question now is whether Kentucky — and America — will heed the warning or allow ‘progress’ to consume the very land, food, water, and power that make progress possible.
The plan calls for a sprawling 5,000-acre “technology campus” near Big Pond and Tuckahoe roads. Local officials admit the buyer is a Fortune 20 giant, described only as a “global, top 10” company with “hundreds of thousands of employees.”
Residents say the tactics are familiar. A few landowners get offers — $35,000 an acre in this case — while the broader community is left to bear the burden: displaced farmland, strained resources, and declining property values. Good luck selling to anyone but the data-center developer once the deal is in motion.
Power drain
The proposed complex in Maysville would demand 2.2 gigawatts of power, starting at 110 megawatts by 2026 and hitting full capacity by 2028-2031. That’s the annual energy use of 1.8 million American homes. For a county of 17,000 people, the numbers are staggering. The project alone would nearly double the East Kentucky Power Cooperative’s yearly output.
And that’s before accounting for water. Data centers require enormous cooling systems that siphon off local supplies. Add in the direct loss of 5,000 acres of farmland and timberland — in a nation already facing record-low cattle herds and shrinking food security — and the price tag for “progress” keeps rising.
By comparison, the average coal plant sits on 585 acres; a natural gas plant, only 30. Those facilities power the nation. This one would devour power and water to feed servers.
A national trend
This isn’t just about Mason County. Hyperscale data centers are sprouting everywhere with the help of state and federal officials eager to rezone farmland. Twenty such facilities are already planned for Kentucky, 10 for Ohio, and 35 for Indiana. Each site removes productive farmland, stresses infrastructure, and hands more of the food and energy supply to giant corporations.
The sales pitch is always the same: jobs and economic development. Yet the real math looks different. The U.S. lost more than 100,000 beef-cow operations between 2017 and 2022. Farmers face higher feed costs, tighter margins, and competition from giant meat-packers. Now, Big Tech threatens to take what’s left.
Cronyism exposed
Mason County Judge-Executive Owen McNeill and other officials signed NDAs while promoting the deal. Residents see it for what it is: promises of prosperity in exchange for their land, heritage, and way of life. On Facebook, 1,500 locals in “We Are Mason County” compare it to a Nigerian prince scam — big promises, little proof, and huge risks.
The scam extends to Frankfort. House Bill 775 exempts data centers from Kentucky’s 6% sales and use tax for 50 years. Servers, networking equipment, cooling systems — all tax-free. Farmers pay sales tax on every tractor and plow, but Google and Meta lobbied for an endless free ride.
RELATED: Time to pump the brakes on Big Tech’s AI boondoggle
Land, food, water, power
At stake are the four essentials of civilization. Land grows food. Water sustains life. Power keeps the lights on. Once given away, none of these can be reclaimed. The boosters of artificial intelligence say America must have the infrastructure for it at any cost. But if AI can’t survive without tax breaks, secrecy, and the seizure of farmland, maybe it isn’t the inevitable juggernaut Silicon Valley claims.
Mason County itself bears the name of George Mason, the anti-Federalist who warned that monopolies in trade and commerce would mean “no Security for ... the People for their Rights.” He did not live to see global monopolies seizing farmland in Kentucky, but he predicted the danger.
The question now is whether Kentucky — and America — will heed the warning or allow “progress” to consume the very land, food, water, and power that make progress possible.
Big Tech colonization is real — zoning laws are the last line of defense
How much of America’s rural landscape, power, water, quality of life, and heritage will be wiped out by one industry — AI data centers? Big Tech firms won’t say. Evidently, it’s as much as we’re willing to tolerate.
David Sacks and his Silicon Valley allies know the stakes. They tried to slip a provision into the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to block all zoning and regulation of AI facilities. Why? Because the only way to cover the country with thousands of hyperscale data centers is to turn rural America into one giant industrial park — with no transparent public plan, no limits on power or water use, and no end in sight.
Zoning remains one of the few tools citizens can use to say no — not just to data centers, but to the entire agenda of unaccountable technocracy.
Before Mark Zuckerberg’s Manhattan-sized complexes even break ground, the United States is already on track for these facilities to consume more energy annually than Poland — a nation of 36.6 million people — used in 2023. That’s not a tech “footprint.” That’s a tech crater.
But a counterrevolution is building.
Loudoun County: The canary in the coal mine
If you want to see America’s future under digital colonization, look at Loudoun County, Virginia. The growth of hyperscale data centers there is so unnatural that some neighborhoods now want to rezone themselves as industrial just to escape.
Patricia Cave says life in her Arcola neighborhood has become impossible, as she and her neighbors have become essentially barricaded by server farms.
“Living on Hiddenwood Lane is no longer an option,” Cave told the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors last year. “We can’t be victims again to political winds that are bigger than us — and we can’t be a human buffer.” The only way she and her neighbors can sell their homes — at pennies on the dollar — is to convert them to industrial property.
Just 10 years ago, Cave’s neighborhood was ringed by rural farmland. Now, with 200 data centers covering roughly 49 million square feet in what’s known as Data Center Alley, you can’t escape their reach. About one-third of Loudoun County’s data centers now sit near residential areas.
Frederick County: Drawing a line
In Frederick County, Maryland, officials saw the writing on the wall and set a hard limit: No more than 1% of the county’s landmass can be used for data centers. It’s a rare example of local government acting to protect the character, environment, and livability of their communities before the tech giants could hollow them out.
Monroe County: Fighting for their ground
In Monroe County, Georgia, residents fought off a proposed rezoning that would have put a massive data center next to homes and farms. The company behind it claimed it would bring jobs. Locals pointed out the reality: a handful of maintenance workers, huge power demands — 1.1 gigawatts, more than the daily usage of a million households — and a future of noise and light pollution.
Residents won — for now.
The pattern is clear
Local victories are more the exception than the rule. The reality is that Big Tech companies are expanding across America with little or no resistance.
Tech companies claim these facilities are the backbone of the future. In reality, they’re engines of resource consumption — each one sucking up hundreds of millions of gallons of water and enough electricity to power the equivalent of large cities in counties with populations in the low five figures.
RELATED: Is this how we beat China? Trump’s AI dream guts small-town USA
Meta, for example, wants to drop a 1.2-gigawatt behemoth in tiny Cheyenne, Wyoming — enough juice for 1 million homes. In drought-stricken Texas, Microsoft, OpenAI, and others are pushing the Stargate project, a cluster of hyperscale data centers around Abilene that would guzzle the power of millions of homes and drain staggering amounts of water. Smaller facilities in Texas have already consumed 463 million gallons in 2023 and 2024.
The profits leave town. The costs — environmental, economic, and social — stay behind.
But the real danger is Washington overriding local efforts to preserve local residents' way of life. If Congress strips away zoning authority in the name of “progress,” the only “progress” will be toward an industrialized, unlivable countryside.
Why zoning matters
Public zoning meetings are the last places where ordinary citizens can stop these projects. Federalizing control would silence local voices. In court, zoning remains one of the few tools citizens can use to say no — not just to data centers, but to the entire agenda of unaccountable technocracy.
For once, the stakes are obvious: if we lose local control, we lose the fight. Loudoun County shows what surrender looks like. Frederick County and Monroe County show what resistance can achieve.
It’s time to choose.
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com