We must build. And fast.
The growing movement against data centers is no longer merely a dispute over zoning. It is becoming a question of whether the United States intends to lead the next technological revolution — or surrender that advantage to China.
Data centers are the physical foundation of artificial intelligence. Every advanced model, cloud service, cybersecurity platform and sophisticated defense application depends on immense computing capacity. AI may appear on a screen as weightless software, but behind it stand processors, cooling systems, fiber networks and enormous quantities of reliable electricity.
Without data centers, there is no serious American AI industry. This is why blanket moratoriums are so potentially dangerous.
Opponents frequently speak as though data centers are optional corporate luxuries: enormous buildings constructed so wealthy technology companies can make even more money. In reality, computing power is rapidly becoming a strategic resource comparable to energy production, semiconductor manufacturing and industrial capacity.
Artificial intelligence is already affecting intelligence collection, military logistics, autonomous systems, weapons development, medical research, advanced manufacturing and cybersecurity. The country with the greatest ability to train and operate sophisticated models will possess an enormous economic and military advantage.
China understands this perfectly. Beijing is investing heavily in AI, energy and computing infrastructure while Chinese institutions study American political divisions in remarkable detail. X recently identified suspected Chinese accounts attempting to amplify opposition to American data centers. The publicly disclosed effort was relatively small and apparently achieved limited engagement, but its direction is revealing.
China does not need to invent American concerns. It only needs to find genuine disputes and intensify them. Electricity prices, water consumption and hostility toward Big Tech offer ready-made opportunities. If Americans can be persuaded to obstruct their own infrastructure while China continues building, Beijing gains an advantage without disabling a single server.
That does not mean everyone attending a county meeting is a Chinese dupe. Most opponents are ordinary Americans raising understandable questions. Data centers consume substantial power. Some require considerable water. Poorly situated facilities can produce noise, obstruct views and alter the character of rural communities. Residents should not be forced to subsidize private development through higher electricity bills.
But these are problems to solve, not reasons to stop building.
Developers can be required to finance new generation and transmission, use closed-loop cooling, meet enforceable noise standards and avoid historically or environmentally sensitive land. States can demand deposits and financial guarantees to prevent speculative projects from clogging grid-connection queues. Local governments can negotiate tax agreements that visibly benefit schools, roads and homeowners.
President Trump’s Ratepayer Protection Pledge points in the right direction: companies creating extraordinary new demand should pay for the generation and infrastructure they require. Governor Greg Abbott’s Texas audit can serve a useful purpose as well, provided it verifies projects and protects the grid without becoming an indefinite moratorium.
National leadership and local accountability are not incompatible.
The economic stakes are also enormous. Building data centers creates well-paid work for electricians, pipefitters, equipment operators and construction crews. The facilities generate substantial property-tax revenue while demanding relatively few government services. More important, the computing capacity inside them supports growth throughout the economy — from pharmaceuticals and engineering to finance, agriculture and manufacturing.
The benefits will not stop at the walls of the server farm. AI could accelerate scientific discovery, increase productivity, help smaller companies compete and create industries that do not yet exist. America has repeatedly prospered by building the infrastructure required by emerging technology before its complete potential was understood.
Rejecting data centers because they impose costs would be like rejecting railroads, electric grids or the internet because their construction caused disruption. Every transformative technology carries trade-offs. The answer is competent regulation, not technological paralysis.
The anti-data-center movement is therefore approaching a consequential fork. It can force the industry to become more responsible, transparent and locally accountable. That would be useful. Or it can become an indiscriminate campaign to halt development, making American energy shortages and regulatory delay into strategic advantages for China.
America cannot afford the latter course. We should insist that data centers are built responsibly — but we must build them. Our future prosperity, technological independence and national security increasingly depend upon it.
(Contributing writer, Brooke Bell)