Where Pennsylvania Candidates Stand on Data Centers

Between Sept. 17 and Oct. 21, the News Lab’s student reporters contacted 126 candidates for the U.S. House and the Pennsylvania House, 524 times in all, to ask where they stand on data centers. Thirty-nine answered.

Data centers are large buildings full of computer servers. They power cloud storage, IT systems and artificial intelligence, and they draw large amounts of electricity and water. Residents near proposed sites have raised concerns about pollution, water supplies, strain on the power grid and rising utility bills.

That concern crosses party lines. In a national survey this summer by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, 61 percent of U.S. adults said they oppose building a new data center in their area. This includes 69 percent of Democrats and 54 percent of Republicans. In Pennsylvania, 74 percent oppose an AI data center in their community and 16 percent say they would support it, according to a recent Quinnipiac University Poll. Both polls show disapproval rising sharply in just a few months.

Pennsylvania ranked ninth nationally in planned data centers earlier this year, according to a Pew Research Center analysis. As of Oct. 21, the state Department of Environmental Protection was tracking about 70 proposed data center projects in 24 counties. Twenty-three are under DEP review and three have cleared it. Most have not yet applied for state environmental permits. DEP counts only projects that need state environmental permits. It doesn’t track local zoning fights, where many proposals first emerge. An independent tracker, TrackDataCenters.com, lists nearly 100 proposed or rumored projects in 35 counties. Cleanview, a private industry tracker, counts more than 200. The largest concentration is in northeastern Pennsylvania. Luzerne and Lackawanna counties account for about a third of the projects in DEP’s count.

Who’s on the ballot?

Pennsylvania has a divided government: a Democratic governor, a Republican-controlled Pennsylvania Senate and a Democratic majority in the state House.

Pennsylvania House of Representatives. All 203 seats in the state House are on the ballot Nov. 3. Representatives serve two-year terms. State lawmakers write the laws that shape data center development in Pennsylvania. That includes the zoning law local governments must follow, the sales tax exemption data centers receive and how much authority state regulators have over their power and water use. Bills must pass both the House and the Senate.

Pennsylvania Senate. Twenty-five of the 50 seats are on the ballot. Senators serve four-year terms. The Senate has the same lawmaking power as the House, and it confirms the governor’s nominees to the Public Utility Commission, which approves electricity rates. 

U.S. House of Representatives. All 17 of Pennsylvania’s seats are on the ballot. Members serve two-year terms. Congress writes the federal laws that govern the interstate power grid, air pollution permits for backup generators and federal tax policy. The Ratepayer Protection Act, which passed the U.S. House in September, is one example. There is no U.S. Senate race in Pennsylvania this year.

Governor. The governor’s race is also on the ballot. It isn’t included in this guide because it has been covered extensively elsewhere. The governor can sign or veto data center legislation, issue executive orders and appoint the heads of state agencies that review data center permits, including the DEP.

What’s already been done?

In March, the state House passed House Bill 1834 by a 104-95 vote. It would direct the Public Utility Commission to regulate large data centers, bar utilities from passing data center costs on to their other customers and require data centers to draw a growing share of their power from clean sources. The Senate has not passed the bill. 

The House also passed House Bill 2198 by a 197-5 vote, which would repeal the state’s Computer Data Center Equipment Incentive Program. The program exempts qualifying data centers from state sales and use tax. The Senate has not passed the bill.

In July, Gov. Josh Shapiro signed a state budget requiring data centers that use more than 10 megawatts of electricity to report their annual energy and water use to the state. Those that don’t report face fines of $10,000 a day. The budget left the sales tax exemption in place, at a projected cost of about $2 billion through mid-2031. Proposals for a statewide moratorium on new data centers have not advanced.

In August, Shapiro signed an executive order tightening state rules for large data centers. Developers who meet the Governor’s Responsible Infrastructure Development Standards for clean energy, community outreach, investment and resource use get a faster path through state permitting and keep their sales tax exemption. Developers who don’t face a slower process.

In September, the U.S. House passed the Ratepayer Protection Act by a 417-3 vote. The bill would direct states to consider rules making data centers, not other customers, pay for the grid upgrades they require. It stalled in the U.S. Senate on a 57-43 vote, short of the 60 votes needed.

Who else has a say?

Most decisions about where data centers go are made locally. Townships, boroughs and cities, and in some places counties, write zoning rules that decide what can be built where. Elected councils and boards of supervisors vote on whether specific projects can go forward. Planning commissions, often made up of volunteers and appointees, review plans and advise them. No local offices are on the ballot this year.

Across Pennsylvania, local officials are reaching different answers to the question of data centers in their municipalities. In Indiana County, construction is underway on a 3,200-acre AI campus at the site of the state’s largest former coal plant. In Cumberland County, Middlesex Township supervisors approved an 18-building data center campus near Carlisle in September. Residents are challenging it in court. In Allegheny County, Springdale Borough Council approved a data center at a former power plant in a 5-2 vote, though every resident who spoke opposed it.

Elsewhere, the answer has been no. Montour County commissioners rejected a rezoning for a data center on farmland in February. In May, East Vincent Township in Chester County turned down a proposal at the former Pennhurst asylum site. And in Archbald, a Lackawanna County borough of about 7,500 residents, where five developers have proposed six campuses covering roughly 14 percent of the town, the borough council unanimously denied a 14-building campus on Oct. 21. Its written decision cites noise from 588 diesel backup generators, fuel storage and public health risks. The developer can still appeal.

Local officials make these decisions under state law. The deadlines they must meet and the standards they apply are all set in Harrisburg by state lawmakers, including those on the Nov. 3 ballot.

How we reached candidates

Between Sept. 17 and Oct. 21, 13 student journalists in the News Lab’s Local Reporting Cohort contacted 126 candidates running for the U.S. House and the Pennsylvania House. Reporters looked first for campaign contacts on campaign websites, social media pages and campaign finance filings. When no campaign contact could be found, or a campaign didn’t reply, they turned to legislative offices, party campaign committees and personal emails listed in public filings. Answers were due Oct. 16. Late answers were accepted.

In all, the News Lab reached out 524 times: 447 emails, 20 phone calls, 48 social media messages and nine online contact forms. Thirty-nine candidates responded. Eighty-seven did not. Each candidate’s page notes how, and how many times, the News Lab tried to reach them.

How answers appear

Candidate answers are published as submitted. They have not been edited for length, grammar or spelling, and they have not been fact-checked. Claims candidates make are their own.

How to view the full voter guide

The guide covers all 17 of Pennsylvania’s U.S. House seats and 52 of the 203 state House districts, with a focus on rural central and western counties. The responses from U.S. House-District 7 candidates Ryan Mackenzie (R-Inc.) and Bob Brooks (D) appear below. U.S. House-District 1 candidates Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Inc.) and Bob Harvie (D) did not respond to thew News Lab’s outreach or questions.

Get the guide: https://bit.ly/PAVoterGuide

Download it before you read. The guide is built to be clicked through, and its links work only in a downloaded copy, not in the Google Drive preview.

• On a computer: Open the link, click the download arrow at the top right, and open the file in Adobe Acrobat Reader, Preview or your web browser.
• On a phone: Open the link, tap the download option, then open the file from your downloads or the Files app.

Once it’s open:

• Find your race. Go to “Races in this guide” on page 8 and tap your district.
• See who answered. Go to “Index of candidate responses” near the end and tap a candidate’s name.
• Don’t know your district? Look it up with the General Assembly’s Find My Legislator tool at palegis.us/find-my-legislator.

For voter registration, polling places and mail ballot rules, go to vote.pa.gov.

U.S. House – District 7 (Lehigh Valley)

Bob Brooks (D)

Q1 — Where do you stand on data center development in Pennsylvania? What legislation, if any, would you support or propose to address concerns raised by Pennsylvanians, including data centers’ effects on electricity rates, water use, air quality, noise and land use?

Utility costs are already too high. The last thing we need are data centers raising our energy costs while an out-of-state corporation gets rich. Communities should have the power to say no to data centers being built in their neighborhoods. Too many of these projects have been pushed through with big tax breaks, secret agreements and costs that end up on the bills of families who never asked for them. Data centers shouldn’t be getting tax breaks like the one Ryan Mackenzie voted for in Harrisburg and then voted to extend for up to 25 years. I support Governor Shapiro’s recent executive order on data centers. I’m grateful he is taking these steps to protect regular Pennsylvanians and allow communities to veto data center proposals in their backyard. In Congress, I’ll support legislation that makes data centers pay the full cost of the power and grid upgrades they need, so those costs never get passed on to residential customers. I’ll support requiring developers to publicly disclose a project’s expected water use, power demand and emissions before it’s approved. And I’ll oppose any federal effort to take siting decisions away from local communities.

Q2 — What do you believe your responsibility is (or will be) as a legislator to control the pace of development, address citizens’ concerns and ensure transparency in the process of approving, regulating or rejecting data centers? What do you believe is the responsibility of other public officials across local municipalities, the state or federal regulators?

My job is to make sure the people of the Lehigh Valley have the final say over what gets built in their backyard, and that they have all the facts before that decision gets made. The federal government should never take the power to decide where a data center gets built out of the hands of the residents who have to live near them. I oppose all legislation that hampers local control, like the 10-year ban on state AI regulation Ryan Mackenzie voted for in the House version of the One Big Beautiful Bill. Local officials should lead on siting and zoning, and they should do it in the open, with public notice and public hearings before any vote. The state should set strong standards that every project has to meet, which is what Governor Shapiro’s executive order does. Federal regulators have a responsibility to make sure the companies driving new power demand pay for it, not the families on the same grid.

Q3 — Data center developers are incentivizing favorable support from local communities and legislators in various ways. In Michigan, a $10 million donation provided a new recreation center for one town. In Louisiana, teachers got $50,000 bonuses from Meta. In Hazle Township here in Pennsylvania, residents are being offered $10,000 per household if an Amazon data center gets built. Should offers like this be allowed, limited or required to be disclosed? Have you accepted, or would you accept, campaign contributions from data center companies, their executives or their PACs?

Every one of these offers should be public, in writing, and disclosed before any local vote. Residents deciding whether to accept a data center deserve to know exactly what’s being offered and who’s offering it. There should be legal guarantees ensuring that these companies follow through with everything promised to the community. A check to community members should never come with a nondisclosure agreement, and it should never be a substitute for letting residents make the call. Unlike my opponent, I do not accept any corporate PAC money and will continue to say no to corporate PAC money if elected.

Ryan Mackenzie (R-Inc.)

Q1 — Where do you stand on data center development in Pennsylvania? What legislation, if any, would you support or propose to address concerns raised by Pennsylvanians, including data centers’ effects on electricity rates, water use, air quality, noise and land use?

Working families, seniors and small businesses should not be left footing the bill for the additional costs created by massive new energy users. That is why I cosponsored the bipartisan Ratepayer Protection Act, which passed the House and is designed to make sure data centers and other large electricity consumers pay their fair share for the energy infrastructure they require. A similar bill is being worked on to address water usage. I have also introduced the bipartisan BILL Drivers Act to bring greater transparency to what is driving electricity bill increases, including the impact of data centers and other large energy users. Just as importantly, I believe in maintaining local control. Concerns about water use, air quality, noise, land use and other impacts should be considered by the communities directly affected. Decisions about whether and where individual developments move forward should remain with those communities. The challenges that we have seen largely stem from Gov. Shapiro’s past decision to fast-track data centers and steamroll local communities. My focus will continue to be protecting ratepayers, maintaining local control and bringing greater transparency to the costs associated with these projects.

Q2 — What do you believe your responsibility is (or will be) as a legislator to control the pace of development, address citizens’ concerns and ensure transparency in the process of approving, regulating or rejecting data centers? What do you believe is the responsibility of other public officials across local municipalities, the state or federal regulators?

My responsibility is to protect consumers, provide greater transparency and safeguard local control. At the federal level, that means making sure working families, seniors and small businesses are protected from unnecessary additional costs created by massive new energy users. That is why I cosponsored the bipartisan Ratepayer Protection Act and introduced the bipartisan BILL Drivers Act to provide consumers with more information about what is driving changes in their electricity bills. At the same time, decisions about whether and where individual developments move forward should remain with the communities directly affected by them. Local officials have an important role in those development decisions, while state officials and regulators have responsibilities related to energy, infrastructure and other issues under their jurisdiction. At every level, residents deserve transparency and the opportunity to have their concerns heard. I believe the right approach is commonsense guardrails that protect existing ratepayers while maintaining local control over development decisions.

Q3 — Data center developers are incentivizing favorable support from local communities and legislators in various ways. In Michigan, a $10 million donation provided a new recreation center for one town. In Louisiana, teachers got $50,000 bonuses from Meta. In Hazle Township here in Pennsylvania, residents are being offered $10,000 per household if an Amazon data center gets built. Should offers like this be allowed, limited or required to be disclosed? Have you accepted, or would you accept, campaign contributions from data center companies, their executives or their PACs?

Local communities should have the right to choose what is best for them. At the same time, decisions involving major developments like data centers should be made transparently. If developers are offering financial incentives, payments or other benefits in connection with a proposed project, residents should know what is being offered and understand the terms of those arrangements. Ultimately, the people who live in these communities are the ones who will experience the effects of these projects, and they deserve a clear and transparent process as local officials consider whether a development is right for their community. I believe in maintaining local control and making sure residents have the information they need to make informed decisions about projects that could have a significant impact on where they live.

This voter guide was produced by the News Lab at Penn State. Candidate outreach and reporting by Alexandra Antoniono, Chayil Dozier, Sadie Harvey, Bronwyn Liber, Esteban Marenco, Avery McGurgan, Piper Murray, Quinn O’Leary, Vivian Parker, Jenna Ramm, Alli Satterfield, Sophia Taberne and Sophie Walton, Hearst Fellows in the News Lab’s Local Reporting Cohort. Introduction by Alli Satterfield and Sophia Taberne. This work was made possible by funding from the Arthur P. Miller Newsroom Fund and the Hearst Foundations.