- Gallup found 71% of Americans opposed building an AI data center in their area, with opponents most often citing resource use, pollution and quality-of-life concerns. <sup>[1]</sup>
- The issue crosses partisan lines: candidates in Texas, Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona and Iowa have backed s, cost-shifting rules or the removal of tax incentives. <sup>[2]</sup>
- Texas has halted some state permitting pending audits, while Pennsylvania has removed AI data centers from fast-track permitting and banned project nondisclosure agreements. <sup>[3]</sup>
- The political response is concentrating on who pays for electricity, water and grid upgrades rather than on whether AI infrastructure should be built at all. <sup>[4]</sup>
Data centers have become a consequential issue in several 2026 races, even though they are not a top national concern for most voters. Across states with sharply different partisan identities, candidates are campaigning against higher utility costs, water consumption, tax exemptions, private power plants and development deals negotiated behind closed doors. [5]
The opposition is large enough to change the behavior of officials who previously promoted data centers as a source of construction jobs, tax revenue and technology investment. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has ordered audits before projects can advance through the state’s interconnection process. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro has removed AI data centers from the state’s fast-track permitting program and prohibited nondisclosure agreements for their projects. [6]
A local land-use fight has reached statewide races #
The strongest evidence of the backlash comes from polling. Gallup’s March 2–18 survey found that 71% of Americans opposed building an AI data center in their area, including 48% who were strongly opposed. Barely a quarter favored the projects. Gallup said opposition to data centers exceeded opposition to local nuclear power plants, which stood at 53% in the same survey. [1]
Other surveys point in the same direction, although the results vary with the wording and sample. A September UMass Amherst poll reported by Stateline found that 65% opposed building an AI data center in their local community and 11% supported it. In Pennsylvania, an early October Quinnipiac poll found that 64% of likely voters believed AI data centers in the state would do more harm than good. An October Florida poll cited by The Verge found that 59% opposed data centers in their own communities, compared with 38% who supported them. [7]
The issue remains secondary to inflation, utilities and other traditional campaign concerns. A September Rainey Center survey found that only 7% of registered voters named data centers as one of their top three issues. But the same poll found that 62% opposed a project in their own community, and 40% said a candidate’s opposition to data centers made them more likely to vote for that candidate. [8]
That combination — low salience but intense local opposition — helps explain why the issue is appearing in close races. It can shape views of a governor or senator who approved tax incentives or supported expedited permitting without becoming the voter’s single most important concern.
Power bills and tax breaks are the common language #
The most durable political argument is about cost allocation. Data-center developers need large, continuous supplies of electricity, and utilities may need to build substations, transmission lines, generation and other infrastructure before a project begins operating. Critics argue that households and small businesses should not finance infrastructure built primarily for large technology companies. The Associated Press has reported that data-center demand has become part of the debate over rising electric bills in the PJM region, which spans 13 states and the District of Columbia. [9]
The concern has created unusual alliances. In Texas, Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico and Republican candidate Ken Paxton both support requiring data centers to bear their own energy-infrastructure costs and ending some tax exemptions, although they frame the issue differently. Talarico has proposed closed-loop water systems, stronger local control and an “AI Dividend” funded by a tax on AI-attributable profits. Paxton’s plan emphasizes Texas control, restrictions on Chinese technology and payments for electricity and added state capacity. [10]
Ohio offers a similar split. Democrat Sherrod Brown has made Republican Sen. Jon Husted’s past support for data-center tax breaks a campaign issue. Husted has responded with the Ratepayer Protection Act, which would require large-load customers to cover their energy costs and the grid upgrades needed to serve them. The bill passed the House but narrowly failed in the Senate. [11]
The Ohio politics is not merely campaign rhetoric. A September Bowling Green State University/YouGov poll found that 75% of respondents opposed data centers in their communities and 63% opposed them in Ohio overall. Axios reported that 21 of the 49 local data-center measures on the 2026 ballot were in Ohio. [12]
States are testing different forms of control #
Texas is moving from promotion to verification. On August 3, Abbott ordered the Public Utility Commission of Texas and ERCOT to audit data centers in the interconnection process before projects could advance. His office said ERCOT was considering more than 474 gigawatts of connection requests, over five times the state grid’s record peak demand. On September 21, Abbott directed the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to halt permits sought by data centers until the audits were complete and said projects must pay their own electrical infrastructure costs and protect water resources. [13]
Pennsylvania has chosen a disclosure-and-cost framework rather than a blanket ban. Shapiro’s Executive Order 2026-05 requires developers seeking state permits to make legally enforceable commitments on energy affordability, environmental protection, workforce development, transparency and community engagement. It removes AI data centers from fast-track permitting, requires local approval before state permits and bars nondisclosure agreements. State requirements include reporting energy and water consumption, peak electricity demand and water sources. [3]
The Pennsylvania approach also addresses grid reliability. The administration says it will work with the state Public Utility Commission on procedures that would make data centers pay for PJM reliability backstop costs and lose service before other customers during grid stress. Those provisions are designed to answer the most politically potent complaint: that data centers can privatize economic gains while shifting some reliability costs to other ratepayers. [14]
Other states are considering s or restrictions. The National Conference of State Legislatures lists proposals in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Vermont, among others. New York lawmakers passed a one-year moratorium for facilities above 20 megawatts, while South Carolina lawmakers proposed blocking local approvals until the legislature adopts a broader oversight framework. [15]
Developers are responding, but the politics has moved ahead #
Technology companies and data-center operators are beginning to offer concessions. Amazon announced a data-center commitment that includes greater disclosure of energy and water use and improved environmental ratings for backup diesel generators. Amazon, Google and Microsoft have also stopped requiring government officials to sign nondisclosure agreements, according to The Associated Press. Microsoft separately introduced a five-point “Community-First AI Infrastructure” plan, while major technology companies have promised to cover some power infrastructure costs. [16]
Those responses have not removed the underlying conflict. AP reported that nearly 40 states offer sales-tax exemptions for data-center owners and developers, while critics say incentives can remain in place even when permanent jobs are limited or local governments must expand roads, water systems and power infrastructure. The Data Center Coalition has spent more than $10 million on pro-data-center advertising in 10 states, while community groups continue to challenge projects at municipal meetings and through ballot campaigns. [16]
The political pattern is visible across geography. In dry Arizona, Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes supports a statewide while Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs favors rules that allow projects to proceed. In New Mexico, a proposed $165 billion Project Jupiter complex has drawn concern from farmers, ranchers and a Republican county commission candidate over dwindling water supplies. In Florida, Democrat David Jolly supports a one-year hyperscale moratorium, while Republican Byron Donalds supports development subject to requirements that companies fund needed electricity and water. [17]
That range of positions suggests the backlash is unlikely to produce one national policy. It is more likely to produce a patchwork of local votes, state-level disclosure rules, conditional tax incentives and utility requirements. For AI companies, cloud providers and data-center developers, the practical consequence is a higher burden of proof. The political questions attached to each project are becoming concrete: who supplies the power, who pays for the upgrades, how much water is used, what benefits remain locally and whether residents can see the deal before it is approved. [18]
Companies mentioned #
Further sources #
The stories that matter, in one email. Free — unsubscribe anytime.