TL;DR

Anti-data center groups doubled to 833 across 49 US states and disrupted 75 projects worth $130bn in Q1 2026, matching all of 2025 in three months.

Grassroots opposition to data center construction in the United States has reached a scale that is starting to reshape where and whether the AI industry can build. A new report from Data Center Watch, a tracker maintained by AI research firm 10a Labs, found that activists blocked or delayed at least 75 projects worth a combined $130 billion in the first quarter of 2026. According to NBC News, that is the most disruptions recorded in a three-month period since the group began tracking in 2023.

The pace represents a structural shift, not a spike. The total number and value of projects disrupted in Q1 roughly matched the full-year total for 2025, according to the report. The number of active anti-data center groups more than doubled from 396 at the end of 2025 to 833 by March, spread across 49 states, with Maryland, Ohio, and Texas hosting the most.

The opposition is bipartisan and locally driven. Communities are organising around electricity costs, water consumption, and noise, the same concerns that have already forced Denmark to pause all new grid connections for data centres and prompted the EU to ask households to cut peak electricity use because AI data centres are straining the grid.

The of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

Legislative momentum is building alongside the grassroots resistance. Data Center Watch counted 14 statewide measures introduced in Q1 2026, and a separate analysis by MultiState identified moratorium bills across 11 states with proposed pauses ranging from three months to four years. More than 300 data-center-related bills were introduced in statehouses in just the first six weeks of the year.

None of the statewide moratoriums have passed yet, but they are getting close. Maine’s legislature passed one in April that would have paused permitting for facilities drawing 20 megawatts or more, the first of its kind in the country. Governor Janet Mills vetoed it but said she would have signed it if the bill had exempted a specific project in Jay, Maine that had strong local support, and she separately signed a law barring data centers from state tax incentives.

A Heatmap Pro poll found that a majority of Americans would “strongly” oppose a data center being built near their home, a shift from a survey nine months earlier that showed the public roughly evenly divided. Gallup data puts the figure at 70% opposed. The speed of the opinion shift suggests the issue is crossing from local planning disputes into broader political territory.

The industry is spending as though the opposition will not hold. US utilities plan to spend $1.4 trillion by 2030 on grid infrastructure driven largely by data centre demand, and hyperscaler capital expenditure is projected to exceed $690 billion in 2026 alone. The gap between what the industry wants to build and what communities are willing to accept is widening faster than either side expected.

In some cases, opposition is now mobilising before any project is officially filed. The mere rumour of a data center has been enough to trigger organised resistance, according to the report. That pre-emptive organising makes siting decisions harder even in states without formal moratoriums, because local permitting bodies face political pressure before a single application lands on their desk.

The Atlantic published a contrarian essay on Friday arguing that the backlash is overblown and that data centers can bring real economic benefits to host communities. The piece acknowledged that opposing data centers is good politics but argued it is not always good policy. Whether that argument gains traction will depend on whether the industry can demonstrate tangible local benefits beyond tax revenue, something most communities have not yet seen.

The report paints a picture of an industry that assumed it could build its way through local opposition with money and speed, and a country that is deciding otherwise, one zoning board at a time.

[ad_2]

Source link

Gambling interest groups are spending big in campaigns ahead of the Pennsylvania primaries this month. 

The Super PAC Win for America, which is funded by sportsbooks FanDuel, DraftKings, and Fanatics, has now given over $5 million to Win for Pennsylvania. 

The money is largely used to back incumbents’ campaigns after gambling groups successfully lobbied to prevent increases in the state’s sports betting tax. Pennsylvania takes 36% of sportsbook revenue in taxes. 

The Win for America PAC primarily supports Republican candidates. Money has been used in Pennsylvania to back the campaigns of Sens. Lisa Baker, Camera Bartolotta, and Chris Gebhard, according to a report from Spotlight PA. 

Sportsbooks Thankful For No Tax Increase

Primarily, gambling companies are backing the candidates who declined to raise taxes on the industry in last year’s budget. 

After the budget passed with no increase, the Sports Betting Alliance (SBA) ran ads thanking Gebhard and Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman for “standing with PA sports fans and against raising taxes.”

The SBA, which includes the three sportsbooks funding Win for Pennsylvania, as well as bet365 and BetMGM, argues that increasing sports betting taxes would “force the companies to pass on the costs to consumers.”

Companies largely passed on the costs to consumers when hit with a new per-bet tax in Illinois last year. The SBA has sued the city of Chicago after it added another levy on top of the new betting surcharge. 

Esports Betting Push Could Be Renewed

Republican politicians have also introduced legislation to expand legal betting in Pennsylvania, including allowing esports gambling. 

Rep. Ed Neilson introduced HB1636 last year, which would legalize esports betting and give the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board the power to authorize other events as it sees fit. 

The legislation was referred to the House Gaming Committee in June last year, but has not made any progress since. 

If the gambling-backed incumbents win re-election, it could help renew the push for esports gambling to be authorized. 

Pennsylvania Proposes Regulating Esports Prediction Markets

In the meantime, residents can wager on esports prediction markets, but the state has also introduced legislation to regulate this. 

A group of Democrats introduced HB2497 last week. The bill proposes charging prediction market platforms a $1 million license fee and imposing a 20% tax on revenue. 

The legislation would also allow the Board to restrict certain markets relating to “sensitive matters,” including elections, military conflicts, judicial rulings, and natural disasters.

It would not, however, restrict esports or other markets on sporting events. 

Skill Gaming Industry Spending On Rival Campaigns

Another key gambling interest in the elections is coming from the skill gaming industry. Sen. Bartolotta, who has been backed by the sportsbooks, said skill games proponents are “trying to take the Senate of Pennsylvania hostage” through campaign spending.

Citizens Alliance, a conservative political group funded almost entirely by skill game developer Pace-O-Matic, has spent millions of dollars in campaigns against Bartoletta, Baker, and Gebhard. 

Gebhard introduced a bill that would restrict and tax skill games across the state. Cliff Maloney, CEO of Citizens Alliance, said the group is  “working to hold Senate Republicans accountable that proposed a new tax on certain small businesses.”

Like Bartolotta, Gebhard spoke out against the campaign against him. He stated, “Seeing the sheer power of third-party money, we probably should be having a conversation on: ‘Is this a positive for the system and the people of Pennsylvania?’”

The primaries on Tuesday will give an indication of which group has spent its money wisely.

Source link