Archive · 17 Sep 2026
House Passes Ratepayer Protection Act Targeting AI Data Center Costs
The House passed a bill about how very large AI data centers should pay for electricity upgrades.
These data centers can use at least 100 megawatts of power.
New power plants, transmission lines and other equipment may be needed to serve them.
The bill says states could consider rules making the companies pay those added costs.
Supporters say families should not receive higher electric bills because of data center growth.
The bill passed 417 to 3, showing support from both major parties.
Three progressive Democrats voted against it.
Critics say states might ignore the proposed protections because they are not mandatory.
The Senate still has to decide whether to take up the bill.
The United States House of Representatives passed the Ratepayer Protection Act by a 417-3 vote.
The bill would let state regulators consider standards for AI data centers using at least 100 megawatts of electricity.
Those standards could require operators to cover new generation, transmission and related infrastructure costs.
Supporters say the measure would prevent households, farmers, seniors and businesses from subsidizing data center expansion.
The Senate has not acted, while critics say voluntary state protections leave consumers and communities insufficiently protected.
- Who
- The United States House of Representatives, led by sponsor Gabe Evans and co-sponsor Kathy Castor, passed the measure; data center operators and electricity customers would be affected.
- What
- The House passed the Ratepayer Protection Act, also identified as House Resolution 9340, concerning electricity costs linked to large AI data centers.
- When
- The House passed the bill on Wednesday; it was introduced in June, with one article specifying June 18, 2026.
- Where
- The legislation concerns AI data centers, state utility regulators and electricity customers in the United States.
- Why
- The bill aims to reduce the risk that consumers will pay for power generation, transmission and other infrastructure required by data centers.
Supporters of the bill
Critics seeking stronger protections
Who should pay for grid expansion?
Supporters of the bill
Gabe Evans, Kathy Castor and other supporters say data center operators creating new electricity demand should pay the resulting infrastructure costs rather than households.
Critics seeking stronger protections
Critics say the bill addresses only some grid-interconnection costs and does not cover the broader consumer and community effects of data center development.
Mandatory versus voluntary protections
Supporters of the bill
Supporters describe the bill as federal guardrails that states can use while preserving state authority over electricity markets.
Critics seeking stronger protections
The League of Conservation Voters and Public Citizen argue that asking states to consider protections may allow regulators to ignore them.
How broadly should Congress regulate AI and data centers?
Supporters of the bill
Supporters say the United States needs infrastructure to compete in AI and that the bill can protect consumers while allowing industry growth.
Critics seeking stronger protections
Rashida Tlaib called for stronger action, including a national data center moratorium and restrictions on federal-land construction; Hakeem Jeffries said Congress should address wider AI concerns.
- House vote
- 417-3
- Covered facilities
- AI data centers with electricity demand of 100 megawatts or more
- Proposed operator responsibility
- Payment for incremental generation, transmission and related infrastructure costs
- State role
- State regulators could adopt or consider the proposed cost-protection standards
- Bill sponsors
- Rep. Gabe Evans, a Colorado Republican, and Rep. Kathy Castor, a Florida Democrat
- Opposition
- Reps. Summer Lee, Delia Ramirez and Rashida Tlaib were the only House members reported to vote against the bill
- Next step
- The Senate has not taken action; John Thune has indicated it could potentially approve the measure
- Criticism
- The League of Conservation Voters and Public Citizen said voluntary or limited protections may not adequately protect consumers and communities
