Here’s a dichotomy in opinion on development that would benefit South Dakota, versus the anti-development forces who don’t want small towns to flourish.
On one hand, you have President Trump lauding a $20 Billion dollar investment in Data Centers and the infrastructure to support them in the Midwest:
On the other, you have anti-development Amanda Radtke (on page 10) complaining about the very thing that president-elect Trump is cheering on – developers bringing in data centers:
Not sure what she has against President Trump, but she might have spent too much time with the Jane Fonda people.
Radke will say she’s against or for anything…as long she gets more speaking engagements, sells more Tshirts or gets her daughter more attention! She says she agrees with Trump on one hand while taking her daughter to Pierre to sell books & “rally” on the other. People need to stop drinking her koolade & open their eyes!!
Why don’t you leave kids out of it.
Trump better watch out, Amanda Radke will be rallying against him.
I hope she calls it the Trump boondoggle! Can’t wait to see if she opens for Jane Fonda, or vice versa. Grab the popcorn
JANE FONDA THE FIRST DOMESTIC TERRORIST.
WENT TO Vietnam. HANOI HILTON. TOOK THE NOTES OUR PRISONERS GAVE TO JANE FONDA. . THEN GAVE THE NOTES TO THE PRISON WARDEN.
WHAT A SUPER K.U. N.T.
TRAITOR. TRAITOR. TRAITOR. .
How much is she getting paid? That’s all little Mandy Radke is worried about. She should write her next children’s book about being a whiner for hire; she’s made an entire career out of it. Much like paid to outrage, liberal protesters…pretty much exactly like that. But she’s “conservative” just ask her.
“These people bringing jobs, bringing revenue, bringing advancement… WE DON’T WANT ANY OF THAT. Those things do NOTHING for the average citizen”. Talk about being on the wrong end of the understanding pool. Ah yes, don’t bring more jobs, don’t bring more tax revenue, don’t bring advancement for South Dakota… because we are not good enough for it??? Radke, you sound like you are trying to keep SD in the dark ages, it is a bad look on you.
They will go to places like Watertown, with cheap municipal electric over these places where the PUC lets the donors gouge each customer. I pay as much in fees as I do for a KWh, good work Watertown, I guess “socialism” wins….
Would this be considered an evil foreign government buying American land?
Where would the power for these multiple projects be generated from? The one in Ellendale, ND on the northern SD border is a 400 MW facility. Is it feasible to assume SD can generate that kind of demand and still serve its citizens reliably and cost effectively? Or would the state have to look at something like Nuclear Power? It seems maybe there is more to this than simply saying it is anti-economic development, unless you are just looking for an echo chamber.
Advanced nuclear power is considered green to some along with solar and wind so that may not work with these new legislators. Maybe a new one of a kind book burning fueled power plant with books shipped within the state and from other states via rail to a location in SD?
As long as South Dakota remains a welfare state with our budget subsidized substantially by taxpayers in other states our legislators can pick and choose what energy and related economic opportunities we can pursue. They can also spend valuable legislative time pushing politically extreme fringe bills too rather than solve real problems everyday South Dakotans face.