AI data centers distract from broader concentration of power, essay argues

Opposition to AI data centers has emerged as a cross-party issue in U.S. politics, with communities raising concerns about land use, energy price pressures, and localized environmental harm. These concerns are legitimate, the authors write, particularly for lower-income communities that see tech companies profiting from local resources while offering little in return.

The essay argues that focusing on data centers obscures the larger stakes: the concentration of power and wealth in AI companies and their expanding influence over entire industries. While data center infrastructure spending in the U.S. is substantial—estimated at three-quarters of a trillion dollars this year—it pales in comparison to the broader markets AI companies aim to dominate, such as enterprise software, healthcare, education, and legal services.

AI companies, the authors contend, are prioritizing resistance to data center opposition over addressing how their products will be used in these sectors. They cite an OpenAI- and Oracle-backed data center in Michigan that overcame local opposition through legal action as an example of how entrenched corporate power can override community concerns.

The essay also warns that data center opposition may be a temporary phenomenon. Advances by Chinese labs in making frontier models smaller and cheaper, along with improvements in running models locally on devices, could reduce demand for large-scale data centers over time. The authors suggest that today’s data center mania may resemble the early-2000s fiber optic cable bubble.

Beyond infrastructure, the authors argue that the concentration of power in AI companies poses the greatest existential risk to society. They call for policies to regulate AI, tax AI computation to internalize environmental costs, and support a global movement for Public AI—an ecosystem developed under public control to prioritize public benefit over private profit.

The authors critique the framing of AI "safety" in U.S. political campaigns, noting that rival AI companies like Anthropic and OpenAI are spending millions to shape the debate in ways that serve their interests. They argue that this "safety" discourse is largely marketing, designed to deflect from the real issue: the unchecked power of AI corporations.