Former U.S. senators Kent Conrad (D‑N.D.) and Saxby Chambliss (R‑Ga.) urged federal and state officials to stop local bans on data centers, arguing in an opinion column that such restrictions threaten American competitiveness in artificial intelligence and national security. The pair — who together spent four decades in the Senate and now advise the American Edge Project — said the measures risk ceding ground to international rivals while costing communities jobs and tax revenue.
Conrad and Chambliss wrote that more than 300 communities in 44 states have adopted moratoriums or bans on data centers, including what they said is one in five counties in Georgia. They noted several recent policy moves: New York halted permits for large facilities in July, Texas has paused new grid connections while regulators audit a backlog, and state legislatures have filed nearly 2,000 bills related to regulating AI.
The former senators framed those local actions as part of a broader strategic competition with China. They said Beijing’s new five‑year plan sets a $1.4 trillion target for its AI industry and that China is preparing to double its national data center capacity by 2030, a buildout they described as central to the long‑term economic and military balance of power.
McDonald’s exits FIFA World Cup as brands reassess sports sponsorships
Stevens defends surprise endorsement of Rogers, says he remains committed to Democrats
While acknowledging that communities enact restrictions out of concern for water use, electricity demand and siting, Conrad and Chambliss argued those worries can be addressed without blanket bans. They pointed to technological and operational changes that reduce environmental impacts, saying many new facilities use closed‑loop recycled water systems that cut freshwater use by up to 70 percent and that, in their view, Microsoft’s latest data centers use about as much water annually as a single restaurant.
On energy, the column cited initiatives such as a “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” that proponents say ensure data center developers — not residents — shoulder extra energy costs tied to new infrastructure. The authors also highlighted workforce and economic benefits, referencing a New York Times piece by Don Slaiman of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers that predicts data center work will increase union hours, and noting The Economist’s reporting that data center construction has helped create “hundreds of thousands” of new jobs since 2023 with many roles paying roughly 40 percent more than comparable positions elsewhere.
Conrad and Chambliss pointed to private training programs as further evidence of local economic gains. They cited Meta’s $115 million Workforce Academy — which the op‑ed said has placed alumni without prior experience into technical jobs in Indianapolis, Baton Rouge, Houston and Columbus — and an industry initiative they described as a coalition of companies including Lowe’s, Nvidia and Bank of America to train 1 million skilled trade workers over the next decade.
Despite those private investments, the authors warned that training alone is insufficient if policy barriers prevent projects from being built. They argued that bans simply shift data center development elsewhere while depriving local communities of construction jobs, tax revenue and subsequent economic activity.
What the authors propose
- Congress should enact a unified national AI framework to prevent a patchwork of differing state rules, the op‑ed said.
- Federal and state agencies should fast‑track grid upgrades and data center permitting so new workforces have projects on which to deploy their skills.
- Governments should prioritize grid modernization, including onshoring production of turbines and transformers, strengthening protections against physical and cyber threats, streamlining permitting, and expanding transmission capacity to support AI infrastructure.
Conrad and Chambliss framed these steps as necessary to preserve U.S. leadership in AI and the broader digital economy, saying that poorly conceived local bans risk surrendering technological advantage. The two noted their advisory roles with the American Edge Project; the group is supported by Meta and other domestic technology organizations.
