Texans Property Rights Are Not For Sale.

By LTC Dewey Collier (Ret.)

Candidate for Texas House District 5

For nine years, House District 5 has had the same Representative.

For nine years, he has asked to be sent back to Austin.

For nine years, rural Texans have watched water planning expand, reservoir proposals advance, and eminent domain remain untouched at its core.

Now, as the Marvin Nichols Reservoir gains renewed attention, we are finally hearing that it is “a problem.”

But acknowledging a problem is not the same thing as fixing it.

Calling property rights “sacred” is not the same thing as defending them as constitutionally secured rights.

And opposing one reservoir project is not the same thing as reforming the broader system that allows government to condemn rural land in the first place.

Across House District 5, Wood, Upshur, Rains, Camp, Smith, and Titus counties, landowners face a reality:

The Texas Water Development Board continues advancing long-range plans that would flood tens of thousands of acres through eminent domain in order to supply water to expanding urban and industrial demand.

When government takes land, it takes water.

When it takes water, it takes control.

And once control is centralized, allocation follows political and corporate priorities — not local families.

At the same time, House District 5 is receiving mailers from a PAC calling itself “Forge the Future Project with Meta,” openly promoting candidates aligned with artificial intelligence and large-scale technology expansion.

Data centers require enormous, continuous water supplies.

That is not speculation. It is infrastructure reality.

So rural Texans are right to ask:

Who will supply that water?

And who will bear the cost?

For nearly a decade, there has been no serious effort to structurally reform eminent domain in a way that permanently protects landowners in this district.

No legislation redefining the abuse of “public use.”

No comprehensive constitutional guardrails.

No fundamental reset of government authority over private property.

Meanwhile, more than 83% of the incumbent’s campaign funding has come from outside House District 5, much of it from PACs.

That matters.

Because human nature is simple:

Most people protect their pocketbook before they protect strangers.

Except Soldiers.

Soldiers swear an oath to defend the liberties of others — often at the risk of their own lives.

I already proved where my loyalty lies.

I do not owe my position to outside money.

I do not answer to PAC infrastructure.

And I will not pretend that property rights are merely “sacred” in rhetoric while leaving them structurally exposed in law.

Eminent domain is theft — even when it is dressed up as planning.

The United States Constitution protects private property rights.

That protection must be enforced, not simply praised.

I have drafted the Sword and Shield Acts to do exactly that — to place firm constitutional limits on delegated authority, to prevent public power from being leveraged for private gain, and to restore clarity to property rights in Texas law.

This race is not about tone.

It is about protection.

After nine years in office, the question is simple:

Are property rights stronger today than they were when he first took office?

If the answer is no, then it is time for change.

House District 5 deserves a Representative who will defend rural landowners with the same seriousness and resolve that Soldiers defend liberty abroad.

Property rights are not symbolic.

They are constitutional.

And they are not for sale.

In Northeast Texas, land is not a commodity.

It is home.

It is heritage.

It is independence.

And it is under threat.

For nine years, you’ve sent a politician.

If you want your property defended

like liberty is defended —

send a Soldier to fight for you in Austin.

Send a Soldier to Fight for YOUR Rights in Austin!