Skip to content

Follow the legislation. Follow the money.

They call it a moratorium. It is a shakedown.

Democratic lawmakers are using data-center moratoria and permitting power to force a federal package of redistribution, union control, nonprofit funding and progressive spending.

Read their own billsSourced to official text
The SchemeSection 01

Permission has become the product.

These proposals follow one mechanism. First they block construction. Then they withhold the permits, easements and utility connections a project cannot live without. Only then is approval offered back — conditioned on political payments and ideological demands that reach far beyond grid capacity and water mitigation.

The mitigation language is the wrapper. Inside it sit union control of the labor force, recurring cash to designated nonprofit organizations, new federal tax streams routed to unrelated programs, and a demand that Congress pass a national redistribution agenda before a single foundation is poured.

  1. 01

    Declare a crisis

    Power, water, land — framed as emergency.

  2. 02

    Freeze construction

    Moratoria and withheld permits halt the project.

  3. 03

    Attach the demands

    Payments, unions, nonprofits, ideological conditions.

  4. 04

    Federalize the model

    Write the state template into federal law.

The price of permission

Pennsylvania SB 724

10%

minimum share of the entire project cost forced into a community-benefits agreement.

Markey federal draft

$3B

over five years for grants requiring a community-based nonprofit partner.

Salinas H.R. 10102

$1.76B

projected annual revenue from a new federal data-center electricity tax.

The RecordSection 02

Four case files.

Case File 01 · H.R. 9442 · Ocasio-Cortez / Sanders

Introduced bill

Freeze every major AI data center until Congress passes the left’s national agenda.

Construction remains prohibited until federal law controls AI product releases, prevents job displacement, redistributes AI wealth, gives communities power to reject projects, and imposes prevailing wage, apprenticeship and project-labor agreements.

Official source: H.R. 9442 text

Quoted from the bill

“Ensuring the wealth generated by those companies is shared with the people of the United States.”
H.R. 9442, 119th Congress
See the money trail behind the slogan

Case File 02 · Sen. Ed Markey

Discussion draft

Make a nonprofit partner part of the federal funding machine.

The draft sets $560M annually for grants plus $40M for technical assistance — $3B over five years. An eligible entity must be a government partnership with a community-based nonprofit. The money can facilitate engagement in zoning and permitting. A separate data-center-funded program can grant money to relevant nonprofits. Project-labor and labor-peace agreements are included.

Official source: discussion draft (PDF)
  • $560Mannual grant funding
  • $40Mtechnical assistance
  • $3Bfive-year total
  • Requiredcommunity-based nonprofit partner
  • Includedproject-labor and labor-peace agreements

Case File 03 · Pennsylvania SB 724 · Senate Democrats

Introduced bill

Pennsylvania writes the nonprofit payment directly into law.

A developer must reach an agreement with at least three community-based organizations. The statutory definition includes labor unions, environmental advocacy organizations, and private nonprofits. At least half must serve designated socially disadvantaged populations. The payment is no less than 10% of total project cost. Authorized spending includes direct nonprofit funding, attorneys, consultants, facilitators, and participation in utility cases — plus an additional $10,000 per MW annual payment.

Official source: SB 724, PN 1555

Statutory demands

  • ≥ 3community-based organizations at the table
  • ≥ 50%must serve socially disadvantaged populations
  • ≥ 10%of total project cost
  • $10,000per megawatt, every year

Case File 04 · H.R. 10102 · Rep. Andrea Salinas

Introduced bill

Turn the AI economy into a permanent federal tax base.

A one-cent-per-kWh excise tax on qualifying data centers — including onsite-generated electricity — projected at $1.76B annually. The revenue is split equally among the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the Housing Trust Fund, Superfund, the Highway Trust Fund, and the Energy Technology Trust Fund.

Four-fifths of the money goes to broad federal programs unrelated to powering the taxed facility.

Official source: H.R. 10102 as introduced

Equal split · 20% each

  • 20%Land and Water Conservation Fund
  • 20%Housing Trust Fund
  • 20%Superfund
  • 20%Highway Trust Fund
  • 20%Energy Technology Trust Fund
State LaboratoriesSection 03

Where the model is tested.

New York

Executive policy

$1 million per megawatt.

Governor Kathy Hochul imposed a moratorium and published a negotiating baseline reaching $400M for a 400MW project. Eligible targets include childcare, museums, performing arts centers, down-payment assistance, EV chargers, public Wi-Fi, community policing, and other locally selected priorities. Organized labor gets a seat at the table, with prevailing wages and project-labor agreements.

Executive Order No. 62ESD CIF policy outline

Michigan

Introduced bills

No agreement. No permit. No construction.

Democratic HB 6137 conditions site plans, permits, easements and utility connection on binding community-benefits agreements. SB 1048 adds prevailing wages, registered apprenticeships and project-labor agreements binding contractors and subcontractors.

HB 6137 (PDF)SB 1048 (PDF)

The sales pitch

“Ensuring the wealth generated by those companies is shared with the people of the United States.”
H.R. 9442, introduced federal bill, Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act
Official source: H.R. 9442 text

What “shared” means in their own legislation

The slogan sounds good. The money trail is the scandal.

Markey federal draft

$3 billion

For five years of grants requiring a government partnership with a community-based nonprofit, plus a separate data-center-funded program that can grant money to nonprofits.

Official source: Markey discussion draft

Pennsylvania SB 724

10% of the entire project

A mandatory community-benefits payment negotiated with organizations statutorily defined to include labor unions, environmental advocacy groups and private nonprofits. It can directly fund those organizations, their lawyers, consultants and participation in regulatory cases.

Official source: SB 724, PN 1555

New York framework

$1 million per megawatt

A government negotiating baseline that can fund childcare, museums, performing arts centers, down-payment assistance, EV chargers, public Wi-Fi, community policing and any other locally selected priority, alongside prevailing-wage and project-labor requirements.

Official source: ESD CIF policy outline

Salinas H.R. 10102

$1.76 billion every year

Projected proceeds from a federal electricity tax on data centers, routed into affordable housing, land conservation, Superfund and highway programs as well as an energy fund.

Official source: H.R. 10102 as introduced

This is how the phrase works: freeze construction, call the confiscation “wealth sharing,” then decide which political organizations and progressive programs receive the money. The slogan is public benefit. The mechanism is compulsory political funding.

Final verdict

This is pay-to-build politics.

Stop the projects. Manufacture scarcity. Make government approval indispensable. Then demand union control, recurring taxes, nonprofit funding and progressive spending before a company can pour concrete. The moratorium supplies the leverage. The permit collects the price.