Each scale answers a different question. A senator can support faster construction and still require a developer to pay for new power lines. The examples explain what each anchor would do in practice.
All three scales run from more enabling or less demanding of developers at 0 to more restrictive or demanding at 4. Construction runs from special fast-tracks to a pause. Electricity costs run from sharing costs with the public to securing developer payment against cancellation or exit. Resource safeguards run from narrowing or waiving review to requiring prior approval.
Earlier versions numbered construction in the opposite direction. The conversion is current construction value = 4 − earlier value. Cost and safeguards numbers stay the same. A reversed number represents the same policy position.
The three-dimensional policy-window box spans the middle 50% on each axis separately. It appears as a flat rectangle when one range has identical endpoints. This shows concentration at an anchor, not universal agreement or a missing dimension.
Buildout posture
Who can approve a new data center, and how readily can construction proceed?
0 · Grant special fast-tracks
Give qualifying facilities access to an expedited approval process, federal site access or a specific regulatory exemption.
Executive Order 14318 directs federal agencies to accelerate permitting for qualifying data-center projects and identify federal sites that could host them. Its scope depends on the project and the underlying permitting law.
Federal data-center permitting order1 · Encourage construction
Recruit facilities or make it easier to serve them with power. A project can still face local approval and pay for its grid connection.
S. 5199 would direct federal regulators to establish standard procedures for connecting large customers to the grid, including options that let service start in stages. The customer would pay for its connection.
GRID Savings Act of 20262 · Case-by-case approval
Leave approval to ordinary state or local siting decisions. A community may approve one site and reject another.
H.R. 10119 would preserve state and local zoning authority over data centers on nonfederal land. A federal agency could not bypass the local decision or make federal funding contingent on surrendering that authority.
Protecting Local Control of Data Centers Act3 · Condition or restrict siting
Let some projects proceed, but bar particular sites or impose an additional condition on permission to build.
S. 5658 would bar new data centers on specified federal lands. A developer could still seek a site outside those lands.
A bill to prohibit the construction of data centers on Federal land, and for other purposes.4 · Pause construction
Stop new construction for a defined period or until stated conditions are met. The scope may be national, statewide or local.
S. 4214 would pause construction and specified upgrades at covered AI data centers until Congress enacts protections for consumers, communities and the environment and ends the pause.
Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium ActRatepayer protection: enforceability
If a data center needs a substation, new generation or a transmission upgrade, who pays? What happens if the project closes or never opens?
0 · Share costs with the public
Allow costs caused by the project to be recovered from other electricity customers or taxpayers.
Suppose a utility builds a substation solely for a new data center. The regulator lets the utility recover part of the cost through a charge on every household’s bill. This is an illustrative tariff, with no sponsor assigned.
1 · Seek voluntary payments
Ask companies to cover the cost through a pledge or a negotiated commitment. The decision to participate remains with the company.
Under the White House Ratepayer Protection Pledge, participating companies commit to supplying or paying for additional power and grid infrastructure. A company’s decision to sign is voluntary.
Ratepayer Protection Pledge2 · Require consideration of rules
Require a regulator to examine a developer-payment rule and decide whether to adopt it. The regulator may decline after considering the proposal.
H.R. 9340 would require consideration of a standard covering infrastructure costs, termination costs and financial assurances for large loads. Each regulator would decide whether to put that standard into effect.
Ratepayer Protection Act3 · Require developer payment
Make the developer responsible for specified costs, through a tariff, a direct charge or a requirement to supply its own power.
S. 3682 would charge a data center for local transmission upgrades that would be unnecessary without its connection. This places a payment obligation on the customer causing the expense.
Power for the People Act of 20264 · Secure cancellation or exit costs
Require payment and protect other customers if the developer cancels, closes or uses less power than promised. A deposit, guarantee or continuing charge can cover that risk.
S. 5653 would require financial assurances before covered grid investments and continued recovery of the costs if a large customer leaves. The protection matters when a utility builds equipment for a load that never materializes.
Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026Resource and community safeguards
What must the developer or reviewing agency do about water use, energy use, emissions or other local effects?
0 · Narrow or waive review
Exempt a class of facilities or related infrastructure from a particular environmental review or limit. The profile identifies the rule and facilities covered.
Executive Order 14318 directs agencies to identify categorical exclusions that could streamline environmental review for qualifying projects. Each exclusion concerns a particular review requirement.
Federal data-center permitting order1 · Encourage efficiency
Use research, technical assistance or a financial incentive to reduce water or energy use. Operators can choose whether to adopt the practice.
S. 4506 would offer a 30% investment tax credit for qualifying water-reuse projects. A data center could claim the credit by investing in eligible recycling equipment.
Advancing Water Reuse Act2 · Disclose or assess impacts
Collect or publish information about a facility’s effects, or give the public a meaningful opportunity to review them. The disclosure itself sets no operating limit.
S. 5640 would require federal agencies to publish information on data centers’ air, water and electricity impacts, including household bill trends. Residents could use the reports to examine local effects.
Data Center Transparency Act of 20263 · Set enforceable standards
Set a binding operating rule, land-use restriction or financial consequence tied to resource use or emissions.
S. 1475 would charge covered operators for emissions above a regional benchmark that tightens over time. An operator exceeding the benchmark would owe a fee.
Clean Cloud Act of 20254 · Require prior approval
Make permission to build depend on meeting resource and community protections before construction begins.
Senator Markey’s discussion draft would require a federal public-interest certificate before construction. The applicant would have to satisfy energy, environmental and economic standards to obtain it.
Protecting Communities from Data Center Impacts Act — Markey discussion draft