• Many Americans are resisting the construction of massive AI data centers in their communities.
• Some local and state governments are issuing moratoriums on data center development.
• Others have banned data center construction altogether.

Americans across the country are rallying against the AI-inspired data center boom.

Now, an increasing number of local lawmakers are backing them up, issuing restrictions, imposing moratoriums, or outright banning construction.

Data centers have become a major source of contention in the United States, where tech leaders, developers, and investors are pumping billions of dollars into the large-scale construction projects. The facilities house the servers powering the AI products sold by Big Tech companies and leading AI startups like Anthropic and OpenAI.

Although data centers in America aren't new, the AI revolution is fueling ever-increasing demand and requiring facilities that dwarf those of the past. A Business Insider investigation published last week found 1,416 data centers already built or approved for construction across 45 states and Washington, DC, in 2025.

The White House has supported this push for more data centers. In 2025, the Trump administration accelerated federal permitting for their construction and directed the US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick to provide financial support for certain projects. The administration also backed the Stargate project, a joint venture between OpenAI, Oracle, and SoftBank that seeks to build out AI infrastructure.

Supporters say the data centers will create new jobs and strengthen the economy, and are necessary if the United States wants to compete with China to lead the world in AI. Critics, however, are more worried about how they will affect the largely rural communities where they are being built.

They worry about the impact on the environment, wildlife, water resources, air quality, electricity costs, traffic, and noise levels. Some have also criticized local officials and developers for what they say has been a lack of transparency in the approval process. Protesters have swarmed community meetings, launched petitions, and even taken legal action to stop data center developments in recent months.

Some high-profile figures in the data center game, including Jeff Bezos and Kevin O'Leary, have tried to sway public opinion. That PR push, however, hasn't had much impact. A Pew Research Center survey earlier this year found that the more Americans learn about data centers, the worse they feel about them.

• The majority of competitive House districts have data centers either planned or under construction.
• Neither party knows how to handle their political fallout heading into the midterms.
• Data centers are shaping up to be a yearslong political slog for both parties.

More than 200 data centers are going up in dozens of competitive House districts — and neither party knows how to handle their political fallout heading into the midterms.

The energy-hungry computing infrastructure being built to meet the explosive demand for artificial intelligence has sparked opposition to rising electric bills, water consumption, use of farmland and influence of the tech industry. That stew of frustration has made data centers the target of campaign ads and a populist fervor that's toppled local elected leaders.

It has also become a rogue element in the races that will decide which party controls the House: The majority of competitive districts — 40 out of 69 — have data centers either planned or under construction, according to an analysis of Data Center Map data by POLITICO, which like Business Insider, is part of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network.

Even though Republicans represent most of those competitive districts, data centers are shaping up to be a yearslong political slog for both parties. Some 1,500 of them are planned or being built in 232 congressional districts, with a nearly even partisan split. Interviews with and statements from more than 20 congressional candidates, political strategists, and activists make clear that while individual campaigns are trying to shape their positions, broader party messaging is essentially nonexistent.

"There's more political signs against AI in our region than for candidates in the upcoming races," said Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur during a hearing this spring. Kaptur is fighting to keep her seat in Ohio's 9th District, where Aligned Data Centers is building a data center that would be used for AI, cloud computing and more. "The public opposition that is arising, it's spontaneous combustion coming up from the grassroots."

The industry's exponential growth means that lawmakers from all parts of the country are now exposed to it, from the dense data center developments in the Virginia suburbs to the heart of the industrial Midwest.

Lawmakers are taking scattershot approaches that range from opposing data centers altogether to embracing them in the name of economic development and national security. Some are eschewing the issue as a local matter, while the White House and Congress grapple with how to regulate the data center buildout.

The White House announced a non-binding agreement in March with technology executives who pledged that their companies would provide their own power for data centers as a way of limiting the economic blow to everyday consumers. Lawmakers have also introduced a handful of bills with similar objectives, from GOP Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley's GRID Act to Democratic Virginia Rep. Suhas Subramanyam's Data Infrastructure Risk Reduction Act to a plan by progressives Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York to enact a federal moratorium on data center construction.

"People should not want their member of Congress deciding local zoning decisions," said Rep. Tom Barrett, a Republican whose Michigan district both parties' congressional arms are targeting — and where there are six data centers operating and six more planned. "It would be a dangerous precedent."

Data center proposals have spurred marathon city council meetings, scores of bills in state legislatures and ballot measure campaigns to ban their construction in California, Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, Maryland, Utah and Ohio, where residents are pushing to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot in November.

"There's not one big national message on this specific thing," said one Democratic strategist working on congressional races, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. "But in certain districts, data centers are going to be a major, major player."

Asked about its strategy on data centers, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Viet Shelton said, "While House Republicans fall in line behind failed policies that spike prices out of control, Democratic candidates and Frontliners are fighting for common sense solutions to provide meaningful price relief, encourage economic growth, and meet the unique needs of their communities." The National Republican Congressional Committee declined to comment for this report.

Although they're motivating politics more than before, the number of data centers has been steadily growing for decades. They have spread in lockstep with the growth of the internet, and more than 2,500 U.S. data center facilities are operating across 373 congressional districts, according to POLITICO's analysis. Virginia, Texas, and California contain the greatest number of data centers, and more than one in three Americans live within 5 miles of one that's already operating. In five states, most residents live within 5 miles of one.

Investors plan to spend hundreds of billions of dollars building new data centers, which would push utilities across the country to make massive electric grid upgrades to feed the facilities — expenses that can be passed to everyone who consumes power. Massive "hyperscale" facilities that are owned by major tech companies demand the most power. And though hyperscalers make up a relatively small portion of the facilities now operating, the number in development would increase their count by 74%.

Despite the demand for data centers, there are examples of proposals that are falling through due to community opposition or shifting business calculations. Just the announcement of a data center can be enough to pressure elected officials to act.

In Wisconsin, for example, four proposals have been canceled and one paused following local pushback, according to Healthy Climate Wisconsin, a nonpartisan public health nonprofit whose work includes raising awareness of data centers' environmental health risks.

"We've been hearing from policymakers across the state that data centers are the top issue they're hearing from their community, as far as concerns," said Abby Novinska-Lois, the organization's executive director. "Data centers will definitely be a factor in upcoming races in Wisconsin, and I would say they're a factor already for those who are holding office in their decisionmaking."

How candidates are reacting

Among 69 House districts expected to be competitive, nearly all already have at least one data center, and most have more on the way.

POLITICO asked the 10 House members in battleground districts with the most upcoming data centers what their stance was on data center regulations. Five of eight Republican incumbents, and one of two Democrats, responded.

Their answers illustrate an awareness that voters are in no mood to greenlight anything that will send electricity bills higher. Even the incumbents most supportive of data centers caveat their support with the need to protect consumers.

Iowa Rep. Zach Nunn — who represents a district with 31 data centers planned and 33 already operating, more data centers than any other Republican incumbent in a competitive race — said in a statement that his state is a "model for how workforce development and AI leadership can work hand in hand."

"But I also hear from Iowans who don't want higher utility bills or sweetheart deals for out-of-state tech companies," he said. "And they're right to be cautious."

The tech lobby has shaped up to be a key player in the midterm races. Candidates who are too critical — particularly incumbents — run the risk of losing support from the tech lobby or attracting fierce opposition.

"They're between a rock and a hard place," said Texas-based GOP consultant Brendan Steinhauser, whose clients have included Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Dan Crenshaw. "Politically, it's not a very smart move to come out and be seen as too close to big tech or doing the bidding of Big Tech, but a lot of the money is flying to them through that."

The advertising so far this election cycle backs that up. All of the congressional and gubernatorial ads that mention data centers, as identified by the political advertising tracker AdImpact,are critical of the facilities. Most attack Republicans for supporting them.

Over an image of cables running from computer equipment, one such ad from the progressive Priorities USA PAC says: "Driven by higher demand for electricity from AI data centers, residents can expect to see a 3% increase in their electric bill. But Pennsylvania's Representative Scott Perry somehow believes we're winning the war on high prices."

Perry, a Republican, told POLITICO he does not support data centers in his district, which includes the cities of Harrisburg and York.

"I don't think it's the best place for it, quite honestly," he said. "Pennsylvania's got a lot of energy in the ground, and the data center to me should be right at this point of energy production and generation, which is kind of in the more rural parts."

Ads from Democrats, including Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, highlight their own records of regulating data centers. Democrats scored some early wins on energy affordability messaging last November as their candidates soared to victory in Virginia and Georgia, promising to place guardrails on data center growth and ensure they pay their share of power costs.

The League of Conservation Voters, an environmental group, launched similar ads targeting Virginia's state legislature incumbents and their data center interests in 2025, and those races were later won by candidates who positioned themselves against data centers. Sara Schreiber, the group's senior vice president for campaigns, said such advertisements were a "powerful" tool for driving home the connection between data centers and affordability.

"There is continuing concern around folks' rising electricity costs," Schreiber said. "They want to support candidates who are showing that they understand, they want to fight against it and have a plan to do so."

Still, Democrats up and down the ticket are open to their construction.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro announced requirements on May 27 for data center developments — including a plan for covering energy costs — but not a moratorium. Paige Cognetti, the mayor of Scranton, Pennsylvania, who is running to unseat Republican Rep. Rob Bresnahan, has said "we are ready for development," but that data centers should be on former industrial sites and not areas that could be used for housing or parks.

The Data Center Coalition, an industry association, has been supportive of the White House's "ratepayer protection pledge" and other policies that require data centers to cover more utility costs. The coalition's senior director of federal affairs, Cy McNeill, said that they're working to educate representatives as constituents increasingly voice concerns about water usage and energy prices.

"How do we provide the facts to the office, or to the congresswoman or congressman, to kind of help educate constituents on this?" McNeill said. "If we actually take a step back, look at the facts, I think the story is a lot different."

Environmental activists say consumer protections don't go far enough. While elected officials who are open to data center construction often focus on keeping energy costs down, activists are worried about other potential risks, too, including water quality and air pollution.

One of the most prominent disputes is out of Memphis, Tennessee, where residents are fighting Elon Musk's expanding xAI data center, the Colossus supercomputer. KeShaun Pearson, the executive director of Memphis Community Against Pollution, said federal action such as the ratepayer protection pledge still allows developers to use polluting energy sources without acknowledging environmental impacts.

The xAI facility, for example, burns enough methane gas to power 280,000 homes — motivating the Memphis organization to take the monitoring of pollution and health risks into their own hands as they push elected officials to act.

"We surely don't want data centers that are directly causing us health issues," Pearson said. "I think our politicians have to understand that and have to move accordingly."

Pavan Acharya and Sean McMinn contributed to this report.

Methodology

The data center locations used for this analysis were based on a combination of Data Center Map, geocod.io and public sources. POLITICO used automation and manual reviews to verify exact coordinates and district assignments, checking against U.S. Census Bureau files.

Data Center Map's data is as of April 30. Data centers included as "upcoming" are those that DCM labels as planned or under construction. The dataset is not an exhaustive list; it is based on voluntary data submissions and collections from providers or other sources. Government-owned data centers are not included.

Some data center companies operate within the same colocation building and lease space to other companies; those cases count as one facility. Facilities that are a part of a campus or multi-tenant building count individually. Cases where the exact facilities within a campus or multi-tenant building are unknown are counted as one data center.

Some data center facility addresses are approximate. In those cases, provided ZIP codes are used to determine congressional districts. In cases where a ZIP code overlapped with more than one district, or if no location information is disclosed for the facility, data centers are excluded from the district-level analysis. The population living within a five mile radius of a data center is determined using only facilities with exact addresses or intersections.

The number of data centers in midterm races account for newly redrawn boundaries finalized in Alabama, California, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas and Utah. Competitive races are based on targets from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee, as well as POLITICO's own reporting.

The Axel Springer Global Reporters Network harnesses the resources of the company's newsrooms to publish ambitious scoops, investigations, interviews, opinion pieces and analysis. It allows journalists — including those from POLITICO, Business Insider, WELT, BILD, Onet and Fakt — to collaborate on major stories for an international audience of hundreds of millions across platforms: online, print, TV and audio.

• Environmental activist Erin Brockovich has adopted a new cause: the impact of data centers.
• She said residents are especially angry about NDAs between developers and local leaders.
• That lack of transparency, she said, is fueling anger among residents who feel ignored.

Big Tech is expanding into communities across the country — and they aren't all that happy about it.

Many residents in cities and towns where tech companies are looking to build large data centers to power their AI products are mobilizing against them, concerned about a possible drain on water supplies, a surge in electricity costs, and a decline in their overall quality of life.

Now, legendary environmental activist Erin Brockovich, famously played by Julia Roberts in the 2000 film about her work, has joined the fight.

Brockovich said on a recent episode of "The Jim Acosta Show" that communities are angry because they feel shut out of the decisions being made in their own backyards — and that the projects are being "shoved down their throat in secrecy."

Brockovich said that residents learn about projects in the proposal stage, only to find that local officials are limited in what they can say because of nondisclosure agreements. In other cases, she said, projects are presented as warehouses rather than data centers.

"There's a lot of secrecy and NDAs at a very proposal stage," Brockovich said.

That lack of transparency, she said, is fueling anger among residents who believe their concerns are being ignored.

High-profile data center projects have faced backlash in recent months. A massive data center project in Utah backed by "Shark Tank" investor Kevin O'Leary has sparked statewide opposition, for example, leading Utah Gov. Spencer Cox to unveil a new "framework" for data center development on Friday that addresses many of the community's concerns.

"Utahns deserve confidence that water resources, air quality, utility rates, wildlife, and quality of life will be protected. This framework helps ensure that data center development aligns with Utah's long-term interests and reflects Utah values," Cox wrote in an X post.

Microsoft, which once relied on NDAs in the early stages of data center development, said earlier this year that it would stop requesting them after local opposition.

"We've made the decision that being transparent with the communities where we operate or seek to operate is paramount," the company said. "This shift is about strengthening public trust, enabling better dialogue, and ensuring that our growth is matched by meaningful engagement."

Microsoft has adopted its own framework for building data centers called the "Community-First AI Infrastructure Plan." It promises to pay for its own electricity, minimize water usage, and create local jobs, among other things.

Brockovich, who has spent decades working with communities on environmental fights, said residents are not opposed to hearing difficult information. What they object to, she said, is being excluded from the process.

"I've worked in communities for 30 years," she said. "They handle the truth."

• Maine Gov. Janet Mills vetoed a bill that would have paused new data center projects until late 2027.
• Mills cited her support for an existing project and said she wanted to study data center impacts.
• Lawmakers in at least 12 states have tried and failed to ban data centers as local resistance grows.

Another state-level effort to ban new data center development just failed, this time in Maine.

Maine Gov. Janet Mills on Friday vetoed a bill that would have put a pause on data centers in the state until late 2027. Mills said she supports a moratorium on data center projects but that the bill, which passed the state House and Senate his month, did not include an exemption for a project already underway.

"A moratorium is appropriate given the impacts of massive data centers in other states on the environment and on electricity rates," Mills said in a letter to the state legislature. "But the final version of this bill fails to allow for a specific project in the Town of Jay that enjoys strong local support from its host community and region."

A statement shared by her office said the $550 million data center redevelopment project was needed in Jay, where a paper mill closure in 2023 "eliminated hundreds of good-paying jobs and dealt a significant blow to the local economy."

The governor said she would have signed the bill had there been a carve-out for the project, which she said is expected to create over 800 construction jobs and at least 100 high-paying permanent jobs in addition to generating property tax revenue.

Mills, a Democrat who is running for US Senate in 2026, said she plans to issue an executive order to create a council to look at the impact of data centers in Maine.

"I believe it necessary and important to examine and plan for the potential impacts of large-scale data centers in Maine, as the use of artificial intelligence becomes more widespread," she said.

Lawmakers in at least 11 other states have also tried and failed to pass legislation that would temporarily ban new data center development, Business Insider previously reported.

The data center boom, fueled by Big Tech's AI ambitions, has sparked pockets of local resistance across the US amid concerns about energy consumption and impact on energy costs as well as the environment.

A Business Insider investigation found Maine had two data centers in the state as of last year.

• If the AI boom ends up a bust, it won't be nearly as brutal as the dot-com crash, Igor Pejic says.
• The "Tech Money" author said Big Tech's self-reliance, varied businesses, and deep pockets help.
• However, he said the rise of index funds means a market slump would have widespread impacts.

If the AI boom collapses, it won't be as catastrophic as the dot-com crash — but the shockwave will be felt far and wide, Igor Pejic says.

The banker and author of a new guide for tech investors titled "Tech Money" told Business Insider this week that Big Tech's unprecedented dominance will limit the magnitude of any market decline.

Pejic underscored the greater "stickiness" of companies like Alphabet and Microsoft compared to the leading companies of the past, such as Exxon Mobil, General Motors, and IBM.

Big Tech companies have remained dominant for decades partly because of their platform models, which give them "almost limitless pricing power" and make them "almost impossible to dislodge," he said.

In other words, they've become powerfully entrenched by attracting so many users, app developers, hardware suppliers, advertisers, and other parties to their ecosystems over time. Now they can easily hike their fees, and new market entrants struggle to capture any market share from them.

Pejic also pointed out that Apple, Meta, and their peers have successfully navigated multiple technological shifts, such as moving from desktop computers to mobile devices and from on-premises IT equipment to cloud hosting.

Big Tech companies also throw off gobs of cash, enabling them to place several big bets at once, and fund their investments instead of relying on costly external financing. Pejic described that as a "moat" against rivals, especially in an AI race characterized by "tremendous infrastructure costs."

Shades of the past

Pejic drew several parallels between the AI boom and the dot-com bubble. The similarities include a game-changing technology, partnerships and financing deals between key players, the buildout of network infrastructure, and "extreme" valuations, he said.

Yet Pejic said an AI crash would "not be as devastating as the dot-com bubble when it burst."

Any market sell-off will be briefer and less severe because today's tech giants have highly profitable core businesses, he said, meaning their stock prices won't collapse completely if their AI bets flop.

They're also less likely to suffer a cash crunch or trigger a financial crisis given their limited reliance on bank funding, and investors have been more discerning about which AI stocks they buy versus rushing to own any business with ".com" in its name, he said.

Pejic did raise some concerns, including the fact that so many companies are spending huge amounts to build the best AI model possible, but the market can probably only support a few of them in the end.

He also flagged the immense amount of investor cash riding on a handful of tech stocks, given the rise of index funds that own indexes such as the S&P 500, which is weighted by market capitalization and thus intensely concentrated in the Magnificent Seven.

"It's very difficult to find a place to hide if this really goes down," Pejic said. "If you're keeping your money in the stock market and AI goes down, it will affect everything."

He noted that risk will only become greater as AI giants such as OpenAI, xAI, and Anthropic go public and join the index, increasing everyday investors' exposure to AI.

Pejic said owning Big Tech stocks was "perhaps the safest way" to profit from AI, given their self-reliance, vast resources, and diversified businesses, which should limit their downside and insulate them from industry shocks such as the emergence of DeepSeek.

For example, he praised Apple's approach of refraining from spending hundreds of billions on microchips and data centers, in favor of seeing how the AI race plays out, and partnering with peers or buying in capabilities to harness the tech.

Apple might not be the "most exciting company," but for investors, owning it is a "clever and quite safe strategy without burning too much cash," he said.

• Data centers power the AI revolution, and are sprouting all over the US.
• They can also be a drain on water and energy, and face opposition in many towns.
• A new Pew Research Center survey found that Americans who know about data centers don't like them.

There are over 1,200 data centers scattered across the United States, and thanks to the AI boom, many more are on the way.

Those data centers also, it seems, confirm the adage "familiarity breeds contempt."

A new survey from the Pew Research Council, conducted in January and published Thursday, found that the more Americans learn about data centers — and their effects on home energy costs, quality of life, the environment, local jobs, and tax revenue — the more cynical they feel about them.

"Two-thirds of adults who have heard a lot about data centers say they're mostly bad for home energy costs, compared with 42% of those who have heard a little," the center reported. "And 63% of those who have heard a lot about the facilities say they're mostly bad for the environment, compared with 48% of those who have heard a little."

Pew found that 25% of adults know "a lot" about data centers, while 50% said "a little" and 25% said "nothing at all." It surveyed 8,500 Americans for the report.

While data centers have been around for decades, their numbers are skyrocketing as companies like Amazon, Microsoft, Meta, and others race to develop ever more intelligent AI models.

Companies like Oracle, for example, will invest $500 billion over four years in AI infrastructure for OpenAI in a venture called Stargate, which is backed by the Trump administration. The president has made data center construction a key pillar of his administration's strategy to defeat China in the race to develop advanced artificial intelligence.

Many Americans outside Silicon Valley, however, feel as excited about another new data center as they do about AI overall. Some communities are now pushing back, citing concerns about energy costs and the environment. Tensions have flared at protests, city hall meetings, and on Capitol Hill.

In response to these growing concerns, tech leaders said this month they would cover a greater share of data center energy costs during a visit to the White House.

"They're going to be making their own electricity," Trump said of the tech companies. "They're not going to be taking from the grid."

Those companies signed a "pledge" to provide their own power, which, in the end, is voluntary and includes no repercussions if they don't comply.