We served opposing presidents, but we agree on how to fix the data-center mess

Two former leaders from opposing administrations found common ground in addressing a critical issue: the rapid development of data centers without adequate regulation. While they disagreed on many matters, both recognized that the current status quo was failing America. Data centers were being built faster than the rules meant to govern them could evolve, leading to concerns over rising power bills, air pollution, strained water supplies, constant noise, and grid reliability.

Communities were pushing back against these developments, with some implementing moratoriums or modifying permitting processes to ensure more responsible construction. The lack of a national framework left state governments scrambling to find solutions, as Washington had failed to provide one.

The situation was reminiscent of the aviation industry's early days, where aircraft outpaced regulatory measures. In 1925, President Coolidge convened a board to study aviation for national defense, leading to the Air Commerce Act of 1926, which established federal oversight. Similar frameworks were later added to address safety, noise, and emissions concerns.

Today, data centers are at the "bonfire stage," without the decades of regulatory development that preceded them. The warning signs were clear: the North American Electric Reliability Corporation issued a Level 3 alert in May, warning of grid instability from sudden swings in data center demand. Pennsylvania's Public Utility Commission reported that the largest grid in the country would miss its reliability standard starting the following year.

Governors responded by imposing moratoriums or modifying permitting processes, seeking a middle ground between no restrictions and unbridled growth. However, these short-term political responses were not the solution. The appropriate approach was a "maybe, but here’s what you have to do" framework, a responsible beginning to a comprehensive regulatory structure.

Data centers housed vital computing power that underpinned American competitiveness, national security, and everyday digital life. The debate over advanced AI systems would continue in national security circles, but the immediate focus was on the infrastructure supporting current AI tools. To stay competitive, America needed computing power that matched or surpassed its adversaries'. Therefore, the focus shifted to the immediate infrastructure challenges while allowing for community involvement and benefits.