Hello again! This is Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, back from paternity leave, and I hope you built up an appetite for my writing over the last three weeks because you’re about to hear a lot more from me. Canadian wildfires, tropical storms over the Gulf, and budding tech issues are lining up a bunch of topics that are squarely in my wheelhouse. Today, we’re covering New York’s data center moratorium. In April, I wrote the argument in favor of more data centers, so… yeah. Let’s see if any of today’s arguments, or 25 days of looking into a miniature and sometimes wailing face, have changed my mind.

That’s not all we’re covering today. We also take a look at a new rule for granting federal funding to colleges, a story about a grassroots food pantry, and I cede the last word on the data center issue to a colleague who disagrees with me. Bring it on, chump. If you’ve got 14 minutes, you’ve got another great edition coming at you.

What happened to Alaska’s election reform?

In 2020, Alaskans voted to adopt a first-of-its-kind election system — top-four open primaries with ranked-choice voting in the general election — which advocates said would expand voter choice and boost consensus-minded candidates. In 2024, an initiative to repeal that system narrowly failed, but a new repeal measure is on the ballot this year. Ahead of that critical vote, Senior Editor Will Kaback traveled to Alaska to speak with the leading voices on each side of the issue about the impact of the state’s election reform — and whether it will survive another challenge.

Quick hits.

1. Sen. Darline Graham (R-SC), who was appointed to serve out the remainder of her late brother Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R) term, said she will run for the Republican nomination for the seat in the state’s special primary election in August. (The announcement)
2. The Pentagon disclosed that close to 100 servicemembers have been injured in the Iran war in the past two weeks, adding that 96% of those injured have since returned to duty. (The update) Separately, the Houthis, an Iran-backed militia group in Yemen, declared a maritime blockade on Saudi Arabia in response to a “continued Saudi siege” on Yemen. (The declaration)
3. President Donald Trump imposed a 50% tariff on select Canadian imports under Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The White House said the duties were retaliation for “discriminatory” trade measures by Canada. (The tariffs)
4. Authorities arrested a man they said started a fire and set off fireworks outside a federal building in New York City, injuring three people. The suspect, an Army veteran, was described as an “anti-ICE activist.” (The incident) 
5. Andy Burnham officially became Britain’s new prime minister, replacing Keir Starmer. President Trump said he and Burnham had a “very good” call and plan to meet in the “not too distant future.” (The call)

Today’s topic.

New York’s data center moratorium. On Tuesday, July 14, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed an executive order pausing construction of new large-scale data centers in the state for up to one year. Hochul said the moratorium is intended to allow policymakers to study the economic and environmental effects of new data centers and consider regulatory action. The governor’s order went into effect immediately, making New York the first state to halt data center construction. 

Back up: Data centers are servers, storage systems, and networking equipment that process and store digital information. Demand for new hubs has increased alongside advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), and technology companies have begun building new data centers to support the compute power needed to reliably provide AI services. However, new construction of the facilities has provoked public backlash and raised concerns about energy and water use and environmental harms. 

Gov. Hochul’s order defines large-scale (or “hyperscale”) data centers as those consuming 50 megawatts or more of energy and providing “data storage, cloud computing, and/or content delivery to customers, internal operations, and/or affiliated business operations.” It exempts facilities that are primarily used to support manufacturing, research, education, and medical care. During the moratorium, the state will complete an environmental review studying data centers’ impacts on electricity demand, the power grid, water consumption, water quality, and air quality. It will also create a “Community Investment Framework” to help municipalities negotiate with prospective data center developers. 

In a press release, Hochul said uncertainty about data centers’ resource use and cost to taxpayers required a temporary pause to allow for a proper assessment of their impact. “New York State is experiencing unprecedented growth in demand for data center development driven by artificial intelligence and other computing operations… that could require massive amounts of energy and water to run and cool thousands of computer servers,” the release read. However, Hochul also affirmed her support for AI in the long run, saying, “The businesses that build technology capable of changing civilization with AI are also capable of working with us to protect our power grid, to protect our water supplies and our communities.”

Many environmental groups praised the order. “This one-year moratorium is a huge step forward for New York communities fighting against an onslaught of massive data center proposals,” Laura Shindell, Food & Water Watch’s New York State director, said. 

However, some New York lawmakers oppose data center construction moratoriums, saying that they will put the state at an economic disadvantage. “A statewide moratorium is the wrong answer to the right questions. It freezes investment [and] takes decisions away from the communities that should be making them… The responsible path is to set clear, firm standards and let willing communities decide for themselves,” Assemblyman Scott Gray (R) wrote in June.

Today, we’ll survey arguments from the left and right about the executive order. Then, Managing Editor Ari Weitzman gives his take.

In USA Today, Sara Pequeño wrote “New York just showed the country how to stop data centers.”

“[The moratorium] was the right move — and a politically savvy one,” Pequeño said. “Hating data centers might be the only thing that Democrats and Republicans can agree on right now, and politicians would be smart to take advantage of this rare moment of bipartisanship. Politicians need to get it together, get on the same page, and follow New York’s lead in implementing a moratorium and, eventually, stronger regulation on data centers.” 

“While I see the benefits that data centers could bring… lawmakers are beholden to the people they serve — not lobbyists or businesses,” Pequeño wrote. “This is an opportunity for politicians at all levels to listen to their constituents and remember who they work for — not the corporations funding their campaigns, but the people… New York’s moratorium is a great first step — next comes the regulation that’s needed to ensure data centers do not further harm the environment and affect quality of life in these communities. I hope to see other states follow suit.”

In Bloomberg, Joe Weisenthal gave an “optimistic case” for the moratorium. 

“[Hochul] insists that the moratorium is not a Trojan horse for a long-term ban or a de-facto ban, by doing one-year pause after one-year pause. Instead she wants to take a year so that communities can figure out the best arrangements with data center companies, so that the entrance of a new facility brings economic benefits to the area,” Weisenthal wrote. “If you’re generally liberal on questions of economic development… I think what you should hope to see is that we get a series of developments where (for fiscal reasons) communities see a tangible benefit.”

“Without that, we’re likely to see a ratchet of more and more restrictions on data center development all around the country in red and blue states,” Weisenthal said. “It’s pretty understandable to be skeptical about the motives of any elected official. And I suppose we’ll only know if this pause achieved anything productive in a year. Maybe the politics will just end up much worse. But there is a version where the growth of the industry continues in a manner that creates less public hostility.”

In MS NOW, Paul Waldman said “Trump’s data center boosterism is a gift to Democrats.”

“When New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed [the] executive order… President Donald Trump was not happy,” Waldman wrote. “‘New York should change its Policy, IMMEDIATELY,’ he posted to Truth Social. ‘The Radical Left Dumocrats must not be allowed to cause us to lose Data Centers, AI, and all of this incredible new Technology, to China, and other countries!’ The New York moratorium is the first such statewide ban in the country, though it may not be the last. The frenzy of data center construction is rapidly becoming one of the most important issues on the political landscape, and unlike most issues, it doesn’t fall cleanly across partisan lines — at least not yet.”

“Given how unpopular data centers are — and how they have become a stand-in for people’s feelings about a rapacious tech industry, greedy billionaires and the threats posed by artificial intelligence — nothing could be better for Democrats than to have voters associate data centers with Republicans,” Waldman said. “[Trump] seems to have decided to become the face of an issue on which he’s on the wrong side of two-thirds of the public. That makes the data center issue an enormous gift to Democrats. It doesn’t take a political genius to see they ought to exploit it for everything it’s worth.”

The New York Post editorial board called the ban a “loss for New York — and a win for China.”

“Hochul may tell herself (and pro-business allies) that her executive order banning data centers is merely a ‘pause’ to appease the greens until she wins re-election, but the pressure to extend it will only grow stronger — and she won’t need the business community after November,” the board wrote. “Worse, she’s kneeling not just to fearmongering by the likes of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders, who see every innovation as a threat, but by Chinese propagandists who want to strangle American AI development in the cradle.” 

“To justify her moratorium, Hochul trotted out Beijing’s talking points that data centers will ‘hike up utility bills, deplete our natural resources, and create uncertainty,’” the board said. “Data centers are crucial to AI; without them, New York has no hope of leading in the next major US growth sector — and little hope of retaining its remaining leadership in older sectors that will increasingly rely on AI, including finance… New York desperately needs a forward-thinking chief executive who’ll stand up to the superstition and enemy propaganda, one who’ll ensure we embrace innovation and economic growth. Instead, we’re stuck with Kathy Hochul.”

In The Daily Caller, David Blackmon said the “moratorium feels all too familiar.”

“The parallel to [Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s] 2014 fracking decision is striking, and the likely outcomes for New Yorkers are equally concerning… Though presented as temporary amid ongoing study, the policy effectively ended high-volume hydraulic fracturing in the state,” Blackmon wrote. “By freezing [data center] permitting for a year (or longer if the legislative bill advances), New York signals uncertainty to developers with project plans under development or ready to go… Projects that might have brought big benefits to upstate or other regions could simply locate elsewhere.” 

“In fairness to Gov. Hochul, there is no question that legitimate concerns exist,” Blackmon said. “But a one-year (or indefinite) moratorium is a blunt instrument. The fracking experience shows that once development is paused on precautionary grounds, political momentum often locks the restriction in place, even as neighboring jurisdictions capture the benefits. New Yorkers should not have to choose between affordable energy and economic opportunity. A far more productive solution would be for Hochul and other state officials to suck it up and do the hard work of ensuring efficient development instead of hiding behind a moratorium.”

For the American Enterprise Institute, James Pethokoukis argued that the policy reveals the “continuing power of America’s stagnationist activist groups.”

“We are unable, as we have been for a half century, to sufficiently overcome the forces of Down Wing anti-progress and stagnation — NIMBYs, radical environmentalists, or simply ideological degrowthers — to solve big problems, such as the scarcity of clean energy,” Pethokoukis wrote. “It’s quite plausible New York Governor Kathy Hochul’s decision to effectively ban construction of large data centers for up to a year will give considerable encouragement to those wishing to replicate the action elsewhere… Clearly the anti-data center movement is gaining ground, and that was true even before the New York permitting pause.”

“Despite all the talk about the escalating power needs of AI infrastructure, it’s now obvious that AI optimists have been underpricing the social license issue. Specifically, how hard those aforementioned Down Wing forces will fight to keep their dominant position by exaggerating issues of electricity prices and water usage as their vectors,” Pethokoukis said. “For these activists, the real issue is their dislike of techno-capitalism, as much as it is disdain for nuclear-powered AI data centers. Even if these data centers are all powered by small modular nuclear reactors and recycle all their water, the activist opposition will continue.”

My take.

Ari Weitzman

Managing Editor

 

• Most people — myself included — are imposing their existing positions onto this order before engaging with it.
• I think data centers are unfairly maligned and are beaten up as a proxy for artificial intelligence.
• New York’s one-year moratorium won’t do anything about AI development, and it’s likely to have a net negative effect.

Reminder: This is where we share a personal opinion. If you have feedback, criticism or compliments, leave a comment on the website or reply to this email.

I don’t know a single person who wants data centers in their backyard. They are loud, unsightly, energy-hungry facilities that can also put demands on water services and roads. It’s very easy to extrapolate a basic stance on Gov. Hochul’s executive order from there: data center bad, law against data center good.

The actual opinions aren’t nearly so primitive, but that truly is the shape of many of the arguments in support of New York’s one-year moratorium. Examine your own response here for a second — if you support this policy, did you soberly arrive at that position after reading the executive order and weighing the pros and cons, or did you cheer as soon as you read the headline and find that everything you learned since has somehow fit with your original stance?

I’ll flip the question on myself. Did I already come to my conclusion on this before I read about the story? 

Before she graduated from Tangle, Associate Editor Lindsey Knuth and I debated this exact question, and I took the position that we should not be slowing down data center construction. I’m coming into this issue with my own biases against the executive order — I believe that the environmental and water-use impacts of data centers are largely exaggerated; that most people who oppose data centers rely daily on the digital services they provide; and that we will all benefit from new, more efficient facilities. I’m nervous about any energy-intensive megaprojects in the Southwest (where water is scarce and cooling is expensive), but in general, I’m in favor of building more advanced — and more efficient — data centers. I articulated my position in April like this: 

The same logic that goes into running and maintaining landfills goes into building and leveraging giant data centers: They’re unsightly and you definitely wouldn’t want to live next to one, but their environmental impacts are frequently overstated — and you also wouldn’t want to live without them.

My initial, gut-level reaction to Hochul’s order was only slightly more evolved than the response I mocked above: data center more good than bad, law against data center more bad than good. But could that be wrong? 

Broadly speaking, the actual text of Executive Order 62 dictates two things: 1) The Department of Public Service will complete a review on the environmental impacts of constructing large data centers, “including energy demand, water use and quality, air quality, disproportionate impacts on disadvantaged communities, and noise levels.” 2) The Department of Environmental Conservation will pause for one year “any discretionary permit, approval, license, or similar form of permission for the construction or expansion of a data center.” The order also directs state agencies to publish recommendations for construction, but that’s the gist — a halt, and a review.

Right away, I can’t help but notice the similarities between this and the hated environmental impact report, a well intended tool weaponized by NIMBYs to slow, delay, and eventually block new developments (often housing) in their neighborhoods. Obviously, building to provide shelter for human beings is not the same as building to provide shelter for server racks, but apartment buildings and data centers are both resources that people — even those who aren’t talking to Claude or ChatGPT daily — use. Despite Gov. Hochul’s insistence to the contrary, I have a hard time believing that this is more than a delay tactic that will beget more delay tactics.

What directives in this order are actually novel? New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act already requires an environmental impact report for any project that could have potentially significant adverse impacts to localities. Municipalities already require major infrastructure projects to go through their planning boards for approval. The state’s Water Resource Law already requires “all non-agricultural water withdrawal systems with the capacity to withdraw 100,000 gallons per day or more” to apply to the state for permits. The New York Independent System Operator already mandates an interconnection study for any project with a large electricity draw. And what more will the New York Department of Public Service tell us after a year of studying the impacts of data centers that university studies, tech companies, think tanks, environmental lobbies, and congressional reports haven’t already discovered?

The thing that should really get a developmental pause and broad review — the thing data centers are a proxy for — is artificial intelligence. Data centers have existed since the dawn of the internet, but most of us only started to talk about them in the past year as they’ve grown to service a technology scaling well ahead of consumer demand and far past its creators’ ability to prepare for its safe usage. It can sometimes feel like we’re being asked to shut up and let the slop wash over us — just download the app, just use the AI-integrated service chatbot, just let Skynet move in next door, just dumbly smile and let the bot do all the thinking. 

But the governor of New York doesn’t have the authority to issue a moratorium on AI development. What she can do instead is signal opposition to the physical proxy for it. And since that proxy also happens to be broadly unpopular (one wonders how “municipal dump” polls in popularity contests), passing a redundant executive order signaling opposition to it is politically advantageous.

Conveniently, I’ve wound up with the same opinion I had when I first read this executive order, which gives me pause. Maybe I’m wrong here. I’m no AI accelerationist, and I won’t weep for the delays in advancement this executive order may (but probably won’t) usher in. What’s the most likely way this order could benefit the state of New York in ways that existing laws and studies can’t? 

In theory, the one-year moratorium could allow the tech industry time to review whether public demand is actually going to merit the massive scale it’s currently building out. Then, if (and when) the AI fervor dies down, some poor town won’t be left supporting a massive unused boondoggle. But that isn’t likely to happen — if AI demand dies, older data centers will probably go offline before new ones — and it wasn’t the rationale behind Gov. Hochul’s order. 

I don’t think this is effective policy. If anything, Hochul’s order will likely push companies that were considering building in New York into other, much more resource-strained regions of the country. I’d probably be singing a different tune if Arizona or Nevada had passed a similar law, but I struggle to see a way New York pausing development of data centers for a year is a net good.

Take the survey: What do you think of Hochul’s order? Let us know.

Disagree? That’s okay. Our opinion is just one of many. Write in and let us know why, and we’ll consider publishing your feedback.

Under the radar.

The Department of Education recently finalized a new metric to determine the effectiveness of college programs, which it will begin testing in 2027. The metric, called the “do no harm” test, will compare the earnings of college students four years after graduation with the earnings of adults holding only high school diplomas. If a bachelor’s program’s median graduate does not earn more than a median high school graduate, it will fail the test and the Department of Education could revoke access to federal loans and, in rare cases, the Pell Grant. The first round of penalties under the new test could begin as early as 2028. Inside Higher Ed has the story.

Numbers.

• 4,556. The number of data centers in the United States as of July 2026. 
• 134. The number of data centers in New York.
• $7 trillion. The projected worldwide investment in building and upgrading data centers between 2026 and 2030. 
• 100,000. The approximate size, in square feet, of the average data center, as of 2023. 
• 37. The number of states with sales tax exemptions specifically for data centers. 
• 67%. The percentage of new data centers planned for rural areas, according to Pew Research.
• 87%. The percentage of existing data centers that are located in urban areas.

The extras.

• One year ago today we covered The Wall Street Journal’s report on Trump and Epstein.
• The most clicked link in our last regular newsletter was Zohran Mamdani’s comments about arresting Benjamin Netanyahu in New York City. 
• Nothing to do with politics: Three women’s world records were just set at the Lumberjack World Championships in Wisconsin.
• Our last survey: 2,615 readers responded to our survey on President Trump firing two commissioners of the Election Assistance Commission, with 46% saying they are highly concerned by the firings. “Some things should remain non-partisan and safe from money influence,” one respondent said. “Whatever it takes to make sure elections are secure,” said another.

Have a nice day.

Alyssa Curtis grew up in a family that relied on weekly trips to food pantries. As a kid, Curtis noticed a lack of quality in the items given out for free, and as an adult decided to come up with a fix. She and her husband, a carpenter, set up their first food pantry last fall. Curtis posted a video of the building process on social media, and after months of supportive messages, they started building more. In May, “Shame Free Collective” was approved as a nonprofit and has since built over 20 pantries to supply residents in and around Lowell, Michigan, with medicine, dog food, cereal, diapers, rice, and mac-and-cheese. “I’ve heard of a lot of moms skipping dinner so that their kids can have food in their bellies,” Curtis said. “That’s what really moved my spirit to do something about creating access.” TODAY has the story.