Latest news with #states
The Independent
2 days ago
- Business
- The Independent
States are rolling out red carpets for data centers. But some lawmakers are pushing back
The explosive growth of the data centers needed to power America 's fast-rising demand for artificial intelligence and cloud computing platforms has spurred states to dangle incentives in hopes of landing an economic bonanza, but it's also eliciting pushback from lawmakers and communities. Activity in state legislatures — and competition for data centers — has been brisk in recent months, amid an intensifying buildout of the energy-hungry data centers and a search for new sites that was ignited by the late 2022 debut of OpenAI's ChatGPT. Many states are offering financial incentives worth tens of millions of dollars. In some cases, those incentives are winning approval, but only after a fight or efforts to require data centers to pay for their own electricity or meet energy efficiency standards. Some state lawmakers have contested the incentives in places where a heavy influx of massive data centers has caused friction with neighboring communities. In large part, the fights revolve around the things that tech companies and data center developers seem to most want: large tracts of land, tax breaks and huge volumes of electricity and water. And their needs are exploding in size: from dozens of megawatts to hundreds of megawatts and from dozens of acres up to hundreds of acres for large-scale data centers sometimes called a hyperscaler. While critics say data centers employ relatively few people and pack little long-term job-creation punch, their advocates say they require a huge number of construction jobs to build, spend enormous sums on goods and local vendors and generate strong tax revenues for local governments. In Pennsylvania, lawmakers are writing legislation to fast-track permitting for data centers. The state is viewed as an up-and-coming data center destination, but there is also a sense that Pennsylvania is missing out on billions of dollars in investment that's landing in other states. 'Pennsylvania has companies that are interested, we have a labor force that is capable and we have a lot of water and natural gas,' said state Rep. Eric Nelson. "That's the winning combination. We just have a bureaucratic process that won't open its doors.' It's been a big year for data centers Kansas approved a new sales tax exemption on goods to build and equip data centers, while Kentucky and Arkansas expanded pre-existing exemptions so that more projects will qualify. Michigan approved one that carries some protections, including requirements to use municipal utility water and clean energy, meet energy-efficiency measures and ensure that it pays for its own electricity. Such tax exemptions are now so widespread — about three dozen states have some version of it — that it is viewed as a must-have for a state to compete. 'It's often a nonstarter if you don't have them, for at least the hyperscalers,' said Andy Cvengros, who helps lead the data center practice at commercial real estate giant JLL. 'It's just such a massive impact on the overall spend of the data center.' Zoning, energy fights often frustrate developers In West Virginia, lawmakers approved a bill to create 'microgrid' districts free from local zoning and electric rate regulations where data centers can procure power from standalone power plants. Gov. Patrick Morrisey, a Republican, called the bill his 'landmark policy proposal' for 2025 to put West Virginia 'in a class of its own to attract new data centers and information technology companies.' Utah and Oklahoma passed laws to make it easier for data center developers to procure their own power supply without going through the grid while Mississippi rolled out tens of millions of dollars in incentives last year to land a pair of Amazon data centers. In South Carolina, Gov. Henry McMaster signed legislation earlier this month that eased regulations to speed up power plant construction to meet demand from data centers, including a massive Facebook facility. The final bill was fought by some lawmakers who say they worried about data centers using disproportionate amounts of water, taking up large tracts of land and forcing regular ratepayers to finance the cost of new power plants. 'I do not like that we're making customers pay for two power plants when they only need one,' Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey told colleagues during floor debate. Still, state Sen. Russell Ott suggested that data centers should be viewed like any other electricity customer because they reflect a society that is 'addicted' to electricity and are 'filling that need and that desire of what we all want. And we're all guilty of it. We're all responsible for it.' Some lawmakers are hesitant In data center hotspots, some lawmakers are pushing back. Lawmakers in Oregon are advancing legislation to order utility regulators to ensure data centers pay the cost of power plants and power lines necessary to serve them. Georgia lawmakers are debating a similar bill. In Virginia, the most heavily developed data center zone in the U.S., Gov. Glenn Youngkin vetoed a bill that would have forced more disclosures from data center developers about their site's noise pollution and water use. In Texas, which endured a deadly winter blackout in 2021, lawmakers are wrestling with how to protect the state's electric grid from fast-growing data center demand. Lawmakers still want to attract data centers, but a bill that would speed up direct hookups between data centers and power plants has provisions that are drawing protests from business groups. Those provisions would give utility regulators new authority to approve those agreements and order big electric users such as data centers to switch to backup generators in a power emergency. Walt Baum, the CEO of Powering Texans, which represents competitive power plant owners, warned lawmakers that those provisions might be making data center developers hesitant to do business in Texas. 'You've seen a lot of new announcements in other states and over the last several months and not as much here in Texas," Baum told House members during a May 7 committee hearing. "I think everybody right now is in a waiting pattern and I worry that we could be losing to other states while that waiting pattern is happening.' ___
Wall Street Journal
3 days ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
It's High Times for State-Subsidized Pot Businesses
State and local governments have a long history of using taxpayer dollars to subsidize bad economic development projects—everything from movie productions to sports arenas to industrial facilities. Now those governments are pumping tens of millions of public dollars into an even worse idea—legal pot businesses—as scientific studies increasingly demonstrate the health risks of regular marijuana use. Since 2012, advocates in 24 states have successfully engineered legalization campaigns by arguing that commercialization would bring marijuana businesses out of the shadows, produce safe, state-supervised weed for recreational use, and swell government coffers. Predictably, pot use has soared. The portion of the population 19 to 30 using pot in the past 30 days has increased to 28.7% from 16.6% since 2012, according to the University of Michigan's national survey on drug use. Among those 35 to 50, it's risen to 19.2% from 7.6%.
Wall Street Journal
4 days ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
The Economic Arguments That Launched the Suits Against Trump Tariffs
President Trump claims tariffs will make the U.S. rich. A coalition of states and small businesses dealt a blow to his trade war by arguing the opposite. On Wednesday, the U.S. Court of International Trade sided with 12 states and a handful of small-business owners in ruling that Trump didn't have the authority to impose sweeping tariffs. These states, which all have Democratic attorneys general, included a basic argument to justify the suit: The levies will lift prices for things they buy.
E&E News
5 days ago
- Business
- E&E News
Democrat demands info on Trump plan to shift national parks to states
Sen. Martin Heinrich is pressing the Trump administration to provide answers about its cost-cutting plan to transfer some national park sites to states. The Democrat from New Mexico, the ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, sent a letter to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum last week asking for more detail about the proposal and expressing his disapproval of the idea. The Trump administration 'expects the states to shoulder the burden of managing these sites without any additional funding or resources, many of which have significant and costly deferred maintenance backlogs,' Heinrich wrote in the letter, which was released Wednesday. Advertisement 'States do not have the same resources as the Federal government to manage and maintain these sites that tell the complex story of our nation,' he said.
The Independent
5 days ago
- Business
- The Independent
Judge spares Trump from massive DOGE lawsuit — leaving Elon Musk holding the bag for ‘unauthorized role'
Donald Trump has been dropped from a lawsuit accusing his administration of illegally wielding power to slash government agencies and purge the federal workforce. But a federal judge won't let Elon Musk escape the case. Musk — tapped by the president to lead the so-called Department of Government Efficiency — is facing a lawsuit from a group of 14 states arguing that the world's wealthiest person lacks any legal authority to carry out mass firings, terminate grants and access sensitive government information and taxpayer data. Attorneys for the Trump administration claimed Musk is only serving a temporary advisory role as a 'special government employee' serving under the president. But District Judge Tanya Chutkan shot down the White House's attempt to 'minimize' his role as 'a mere advisor without any formal authority.' Musk instead 'occupies a continuing position' and 'exercises significant authority,' all without 'proper appointment' by Congress, Chutkan wrote. The states suing the administration plausibly allege that Musk 'makes decisions about 'federal expenditures, contracts, government property, and the very existence of federal agencies,'' she added. DOGE caused 'financial harm' to states by slashing federal funding while gaining 'unauthorized access' to 'private and proprietary information,' according to the lawsuit. 'The Constitution does not permit the Executive to commandeer the entire appointments power by unilaterally creating a federal agency pursuant to Executive Order and insulating its principal officer from the Constitution as an 'advisor' in name only,' Chutkan wrote. Musk and Trump have characterized DOGE — operating as the U.S. Doge Service, formerly the U.S. Digital Service — as 'tech support' to end 'waste, fraud and abuse.' His DOGE agents, or federal workers doing work on its behalf, are deployed across all federal agencies Musk's position as a 'special government employee' is limited to 130 days within the year, which would mean the tech billionaire could no longer be working at the White House by the end of this month. But White House officials told The Independent that those working hours don't fall neatly within the calendar. Musk is expected to remain a fixture within the administration, though he announced he plans to limit his time in Washington, D.C. — and how much money he spends on political campaigns — to focus on his company Tesla, which saw profits drop by 71 percent within the first three months of the year. The lawsuit is among several accusing the Trump administration of unconstitutionally running roughshod through federal agencies. That breakneck effort to keep up with DOGE's actions in court has been met with what appears to be attempts from administration officials to obfuscate the true nature of Musk's role — or scramble to name someone else in charge. After weeks of secrecy in court and refusals from the White House to answer who, exactly, was running DOGE, reporters were sent a message on February 25 from an unnamed White House spokesperson naming Amy Gleason as the DOGE administrator. Administration officials have insisted that Musk is not the administrator for DOGE. Trump, however, has said the exact opposite. Musk has 'no actual or formal authority to make government decisions himself,' according to a sworn statement from a senior White House official on February 18. The next day, Trump himself said he 'signed an order creating the Department of Government Efficiency, and put a man named Elon Musk in charge.' In a statement, New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez, who brought the case against DOGE, called Judge Chutkan's decision 'an important milestone for preserving America's system of checks and balances.' 'We are proud to move this case forward and help bring Elon Musk's reign of terror to an end,' he added.
