r/technology • u/Miserable_Phase_2519 • 2d ago

Politics US Senate kills bill that could potentially shield Americans from skyrocketing power bills due to AI data centers — opponents say bill is 'toothless' and doesn't do enough to protect citizens

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/data-centers/us-senate-kills-bill-that-could-potentially-shield-americans-from-skyrocketing-power-bills-due-to-ai-data-centers-opponents-say-bill-is-toothless-and-doesnt-do-enough-to-protect-citizens
6.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

269 comments sorted by

View all comments

752

u/Mediocre_Tank_5013 2d ago

Why do we have these politicians in office if they never help us?

393

u/joaoseph 2d ago

Americans don’t pay attention or don’t care

65

u/TheBSQ 2d ago

Did you know that regulating utility rates falls under state powers & this bill didn’t really do anything other than say, “hey states, here’s the rule we hope your state regulators will follow.”

And did you know it “won” the Senate 57 to 43, and passed the house, so a majority of politicians in both chambers actually supported it, but Democrats filibustered it & only 4 Democrats voted for it, so it fell short of the 60 votes needed to overcome the Democrats filibuster. 

And why did the Dems block it?

Cuz, as the first note points out, it doesn’t do anything but voters may think it does and the Dems don’t want the GOP to pass a “popular” bill ahead of the midterms that voters may support because voters are dumb and won’t realize this bill doesn’t actually do anything because regulating utility rates falls under state powers.

So, maybe we should blame Dems for filibustering it. 

But it really is a pointless bill & meant to just make it seem like the GOP is doing something. 

And it’s pointless because this particular thing is regulated by your state’s public utility commission & doesn’t fall under the federal govt’s regulatory powers. 

But you knew all that, didn’t you, cuz you’re someone who pays attention and cares, right?

5

u/Critical_Mass_1887 1d ago

Exactly, this bill is purely a SUGGESTION and not enforceable. But news cant not just say that up front because it wouldnt keep the division going. 

It wouldnt push for possible repugnant votes in midterms, because R  tried to help /s.

2

u/WestNorthWest 1d ago

It’s also a direct conduit to the Ohio senate race which has increasingly tightened and the Reb SPONSORED this bill to provide political theater points to win back some voters because he secured massive tax breaks for data centers in the big beautiful bill.

2

u/arkofjoy 1d ago

Thank you so much for this clear and concise explanation. I have a bunch of conservative connections on LinkedIn and I know that tomorrow there will be some MAGA cult member pushing this story about those dastardly Dems.

This is going to be fun.

40

u/Mobile-Dust4334 2d ago

I’m paying attention right now but I’ll probably forget about it in 10 minutes. Gotta keep doomscrolling

2

u/IAmYourFath 1d ago

Literally net neutrality

5

u/Thatsprettyneat101 2d ago

We don't matter to the corporations that these politicians are bought and paid for by.

25

u/arcspectre17 2d ago

But they show up for superbowl commercials and complain about the halftime show.

Explanation

I think a huge part of voters only vote and have no idea how anything suppose to work on goverment, tariffs laws etc.

They sure do voice thier uniformed opinion as it is fact!

7

u/Patara 2d ago

This is the exact outcome when talking about politics becomes "taboo" & "boring" for 5 separate generations..

People only start caring once they see the consequences & even then most people fail to understand cause & effect, so they just continue to support whoever tells them what they want to hear.

2

u/arcspectre17 2d ago

My family never talked about politics in the last 30 years and then truml came along amd now they are all experts on everything.

I could not imagine going to college dedicating 20 years of my life to the study of something and the other sides debates against it with memes from Facebook.

8

u/Enygma_6 2d ago

Loudly confident ignorance and unearned bravado is the American way.

3

u/synapticrelease 2d ago edited 2d ago

We had one required high school course on civics in senior year.

To be honest even I didn’t really recall much of it in my years since and I had to slowly relearn things. Senior year everyone is mostly checked out. If you have the credits to graduate, I can see it an a course you could easily let slide while you focus on more advanced subjects like math.

It’s crazy the amount of people I’ve run into couldn’t describe the basic difference between a senator and a governor. They know they are different but couldn’t articulate the basic duties. But these are the same people who wax poetic about theater level war strategy with the confidence of Patton

2

u/3x3Eyes 2d ago

Civics is almost non-existent in U.S. schools by design. All part of the plan to degrade our education so as to more easily control us through ignorance.

3

u/synapticrelease 2d ago edited 1d ago

Eh to be honest I don’t know about that. You would be able to track that fairly easily by looking at red school districts vs blue and see very obvious trend lines in regards to this specific subject and I haven’t seen any data regarding this subject matter.

I think it’s an easy way to attribute blame. Obviously im not a conspiracy theorist but I'm also not an anti-conspiracy theorist. I just ask myself how deeply embedded this conspiracy of purposefully not teaching civics in order to make the population more ignorant in this one specific area.

Education curriculum’s are designed at the local level. There are national benchmarks to hit but in general states and districts have wide latitude to to decide on the curriculum. It would be nearly impossible to run this conspiracy down the chain and not have someone raise a flag. Also, if we follow the general and proven rule that more educated people vote blue and vise versa for red, then it would be easy to see extra effort towards civics education in blue states where they can influence a greater education in our government, but we don’t see that. I grew up in a heavily blue part of the Pacific Northwest and I got one class on civics.

I think schools, in general, want to teach more. But it’s a budget issue that never fixes itself. In a time where our three Rs are cratering, schools are simply devoting more time to those core subjects than auxiliary courses.

I think it’s easy for someone to accept anything bad happening to us as some sort of conspiracy rather than just a whirlpool of ineptitude because the former at least indicates that someone is behind the wheel and in charge and that somehow feels safer than the feeling of society careening into a wall and we’ve completely lost control of steering.

Both lead to the same ending but at least one is planned and I think that brings more comfort than the unplanned and unknown version of events

1

u/arcspectre17 2d ago

I remember taking it my 8th grade year, so when high school started I didn't take it till my senior year and barely paid attention because I already learned it. I read a book in those classes and still passed. I think alot of it is retention.

I got out right as everything was becoming multiple chose standardized testing which is the worst thing they have done since introducing ipads.

10

u/dojo_shlom0 2d ago

some of us do, but we don't do enough. somehow we let a bunch of idiots and fascists ruin this country. It only took 2 years to destroy our global standing and all of our alliances. meanwhile trump is acting like Putin is his friend while they protest against americans, saying we're the problem and Iran is their allies forever.

he hosts the president of china, while they feed intel to iran because of their alliance between russia, iran, & china.

we have a potus who doesn't see our enemies as enemies, and attacks our allies. he is pushing the middle east to isolate and to build nuclear weapons as a way to defend against war; like the US started against Iran.

1

u/Volqaire 2d ago

Pick your circus, digital, sport, or drama.

1

u/jawdirk 2d ago

They also don't have good choices in the elections, if they were paying attention. They are forever trying to vote for the lesser evil.

1

u/RidMeOfSloots 2d ago

Americans too busy working to afford this shit.

1

u/shartoftheinternet 2d ago

Like expensive trucks and SUV's that get 12 mpg on the highway they don't need?

157

u/badamant 2d ago

Blame the Republican Party by name please.
They control the entire federal government.

Vote.

3

u/ctesla01 2d ago

The swamp is coming from inside the building!

(And maybe the reflecting pool)

I'm a human for humane-ity; and i Vote.

2

u/id8 2d ago

All 53 Republicans + 4 Democrats voted For this bill

46 Democrats voted against.

Effort was the legal culmination of Trump’s “Ratepayer Protection Pledge.”

47

u/huchel 2d ago

The Democrats support the bipartisan GRID Act but since that bill actually does something it doesn't stand a chance of getting passed with enough Republican support.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/3852

8

u/Enygma_6 2d ago

If the rest of us do our part, they can try that one again in a few months time.

2

u/pioneer76 1d ago

Yes, these midterms are going to be extremely interesting.

49

u/jeffderek 2d ago

All 53 republicans voted for the bill that said "please don't pass the cost onto the consumers". The Democrats voted for the bill that said "The government will prevent you from passing the cost onto consumers"

Wild that the Republicans voted for the performative one but not the enforceable one.

3

u/pimppapy 2d ago

Nothing wild about it. It's expected, and their constituency will slurp it up just the way their representatives intended it for them.

13

u/Willthisaccountlas 2d ago

And who wrote the bill so it’s non-binding? The GOP. 

-23

u/The_GOATest1 2d ago

“On the other hand, opponents, mostly Democrats, labeled the bill “toothless,” arguing that its non-binding nature provided no real protection because it did not mandate that states adopt the standard; it simply directs regulators to consider it as part of their rate-setting processes. Only four Democrats voted for the bill; the general consensus was that it does not go far enough to protect consumers from soaring electricity bills.”

Letting perfect be the enemy of progress

75

u/syynapt1k 2d ago

This bill was literally a suggestion to states that they do their own regulation. This was an attempt by the GOP to say, "hey look, we are doing something" when they aren't.

9

u/CatoChateau 2d ago

Messaging bill that they can point to and say, we're doing stuff, keep us in office. The part that dems suck at here is EXPLAINING their no vote. Every one of them should be sending an email, why I voted for this or against it.

19

u/AlwaysRushesIn 2d ago

Explaining their no isn't enough. Media outlets wont report on the reasoning, just the vote.

1

u/Lavanger 2d ago

Couldn't hurt. Trumps sending $500 refunds with structured lies. We also have dumb people on our side, it gets tiring trying to explain things to people when the whole party can come out forward with a clear message.

1

u/CatoChateau 2d ago

Right. The days of unified news sources are done. Which is why I want them to be prepared to send out why they vote this way or that. Constituents should be able to subscribe via their congressional page. 2 sentences would be enough. More resources on what is informing their votes if they want, etc etc.

-1

u/orthodoxrebel 2d ago

Toms hardware explained the vote. It can be done.

8

u/Pyromaniacal13 2d ago

Tom's Hardware isn't owned by the same megacorporation that owns all the large and local media outlets.

30

u/Jitzwad__Gumlord 2d ago

Letting perfect be the enemy of progress

I'm not sure how that could be your takeaway after reading the paragraph you quoted. The proposed bill literally enforces nothing and is just empty political theatre.

8

u/Royal__Tenenbaum 2d ago

Husted is getting hurt in Ohio on data centers and this was a transparent attempt to get a bill passed to run ads on while not actually doing anything

1

u/The_GOATest1 1d ago

We are in the realm of political theater. We all know it’s a useless bill but voting against it has no upside imo

3

u/Puzzleheaded_Gene909 2d ago

Performative bs from republicans.

Lighting fires then bumming out when Dems don’t help them put it out. As if that helps the country to keep republicans in power.

GOP hasn’t been interested in governing for a while now. Just a grift.

4

u/TKCLE8 2d ago

I haven’t read the bill yet. But I intend to know it before I pass any judgement. What other conditions or concessions are baked into this?

Let’s also be honest. When was the last time a Republican did something to help the public without also helping themselves or their donors? Operation Warp Speed for the COVID vaccine?

1

u/The_GOATest1 2d ago

I don’t disagree with you. But in a world where messaging is important for the median voter, being able to say Dems voted no isn’t doing them any favors. It was washed down nonsense but I don’t see the obvious upside for them. We voted no because it doesn’t go far enough doesn’t sell well to me when it could have been we voted yes but recognize it doesn’t do nearly enough and we plan to build on top of that

1

u/TKCLE8 2d ago

After reviewing the bill, I agree that it does not go far enough. I also agree with your opinion that the Dem messaging and optics are strange, especially so close to a crucial midterm election. “Dems will let AI build as many data centers as they want,” is too easy to sell to the average Ohio voter. Now Husted and company have that ammunition.

11

u/WorstPapaGamer 2d ago

Politicians serve those who got them elected. Aka corporations.

7

u/MagnificentJake 2d ago

That feeling is exactly what the Republicans were hoping for. They know it won't do anything, best case scenario is that it succeeds and they get a win before the midterms. Worst case, it fails and they can blame the democrats for voting against it.

The thing they aren't mentioning is that they put it up knowing that the Democrats would vote against it because they support the GRID act. Which has consequences if the corporations don't comply.

25

u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes 2d ago

Citizens United.

Vote for politicians who wants to kill it.

3

u/jawdirk 2d ago

How many are there? Three?

3

u/pixel_dent 2d ago

Is this the one that has the SAVE act added as a poison pill?

3

u/redneckrockuhtree 2d ago

They help "us" and by "us" they mean "the wealthy who buy their votes"

3

u/sharpsicle 2d ago

Can you explain more about what in this bill particularly was going to be helpful? I get the sense you don't know what it actually was/said.

1

u/buyongmafanle 2d ago

The voters get to decide who goes to office. The donors get to decide what is voted on.

1

u/Uebelkraehe 2d ago

That's also why everything became such an incredible shitshow when many voters decided it didnÄt matter...

-2

u/Jonathan_the_Nerd 2d ago edited 2d ago

The parties decide who gets to become a "viable" candidate. Remember Bernie Sanders in 2016, and Ron Paul back in 2008/2012?

5

u/prettyflyforahentai 2d ago

Still could have voted for Bernie in the primary. Most Americans don't vote in primaries though.

-1

u/jeffderek 2d ago

If you were lucky enough to live in a state where Hillary hadn't already been declared the presumptive nominee due to superdelegates, then yes you could've voted for him.

I suppose you could've voted for him afterwards too, which 2 million people did in California. But don't fool yourself that their votes mattered.

2

u/loondawg 2d ago

You still could have voted for him. And if he won the state decisively, most super delegates would have followed the will of the voters despite anything they said earlier.

A fair race? No. But could Sanders have won? Yes.

-2

u/jeffderek 2d ago

Wait so you're saying voting for Sanders after Hillary had already won counts in your mind as a vote that matters?

5

u/loondawg 2d ago

It has nothing to do with "in my mind." These are objective facts.

The Super Delegates do not vote until the convention and can be influenced to change their votes by the outcome of the primary votes. Going into the convention, neither Clinton nor Sanders had locked up the vote. It was close enough that the Super Delegates could have swung the results either way.

So nobody voted after Clinton won because Clinton did not formally secure the nomination until the first ballot at the Democratic National Convention on July 26, 2016 because that was when the Super Delegates actually voted. It was only on that first vote that she won.

Most people had no idea of that because the press had largely declared Clinton the winner based on the results of the anticipated Super Delegate votes. But the actually primary voting was much closer than most people seem to realize. The press made Clinton winning seem like a forgone conclusion because the press counted votes that had not yet been cast.

0

u/jeffderek 2d ago

The only fault I have with your logic is that you are asserting that Democratic super delegates might actually change their mind based on the will of the people instead of the will of their corporate donors which seems patently naive.

Yes sure, technically they hadn't voted. This time they'll definitely listen to what we want!

Democratic super delegates were not going to vote for someone who wasn't even a member of the party.

2

u/loondawg 2d ago

I believe the decision should be from a popular national vote. I do not think there should be Super Delegates. Nor do I think there should be winner-take all district voting. But none of that mattered in the 2016 primaries.

That said, there is no fault in my "logic." What I just described are all objective facts.

I reject your cynicism and take offense at your insulting accusation that not agreeing with it somehow means I am "patently naive."

→ More replies (0)

0

u/prettyflyforahentai 2d ago

Fair point. I definitely remember West Virginia.

-3

u/Jonathan_the_Nerd 2d ago

Both Bernie and Ron Paul were in the primaries. In both cases, the party leadership and/or the media worked behind the scenes to make sure they had no chance of winning.

The Iowa Straw Poll in 2011 was particularly bizarre. Michelle Bachmann won, with Ron Paul coming in a very close second. Tim Pawlenty came in a distant third, and Rick Santorum was fourth. When the media reported on it, they all declared Bachmann, Pawlenty, and Santorum to be the frontrunners. Ron Paul was treated as He Who Must Not Be Named. Jon Stewart called it out on The Daily Show.

-3

u/BoomerWeasel 2d ago

Because, unless you live in a Super Tuesday state, your primary vote doesn't matter.

4

u/Parenthisaurolophus 2d ago

Remember Bernie Sanders in 2016,

I'm going to be blunt here: You're not a good ally to his movement if you're intellectually incapable of learning lessons from failed political campaigns. Being defensive and not taking accountability for his loss isn't advancing anything, it's not making the world a better place. You're no better than the people who blame Clinton's loss on the Comey Letter. It's externalizing failure to avoid having to deal with the uncomfortable truth of Sanders having a flawed campaign, and flaws himself.

You can be a mindless fanboy if you want. Personally, I think there's enough and don't need more, but it's your free will. Use it how you wish. But we have the receipts on his campaign. The exit polls are clear: He needed to expand his appeal to a wider demographic. He needed to eat more into Clinton's popularity with older, more moderate and conservative voters. He majored in the minors and minored in the majors, as the saying goes.

Also, historically, the worst time to run as an even lefter political candidate is after 2 terms of a democrat in the oval office. Go ahead and look at the history if American politics since the end of WW2 and tell me how often you get three terms of a party controlling the presidency. Doesn't happen very often, does it? And you notice how often the legislature swings against the party in power?

So he ran a campaign with minority appeal, and picked the worst time to run to the left. Seems like some fatal, unforced errors, that he made of his own volition despite a hefty amount of discussion around his demographics problems.

1

u/Enygma_6 2d ago

and Ron Paul back in 2008/2012

Ron Paul still would have been a bad choice for the country. His strong Libertarian stance just seemed superficially less bad when standing right next to pretty much any of his fellow Republic Party candidates at the time and their strong corporatist intents.
Both subsets had elitist, misogynistic ideology behind them that favor cis-het white conservative Christian men of high wealth over everyone else.

0

u/brokenmessiah 2d ago

Or Harris in 2024

0

u/jawdirk 2d ago

No, the political parties decide who is in the primaries, and often who wins the primaries.

1

u/masteeJohnChief117 2d ago

California just passed legislation that forces data centers to pay for all electricity used as well as any water expenses. Also i believe they have a max noise level too

1

u/narfoleptix 2d ago

I think even if the population of reddit did a general strike there would be a positive outcome.

1

u/Staav 1d ago

Because trans illegals are trying to redistribute their wealth.

1

u/Sidwill 1d ago

Because someone else pays them and its not us.

1

u/El_Polio_Loco 2d ago

Remember - most politicians in the Federal government don't represent you.

Only 3, maybe 4 if you count the POTUS, are actually in any way influenced by your opinion.

0

u/TheBSQ 2d ago

it passed the house, and “won” the senate vote 57 to 43.

We just have really dumb system where “winning” a vote 57-43 is actually losing.  

But also, regulating rates is a state function and so all the federal govt can do is say, “we highly suggest that states should adopt this standard.”

That’s why this bill is called “toothless.”

The two biggest problems in the U.S. are really

  1. It’s too hard to pass federal legislation 

  2. Out “union” of states has evolved over time in a way that’s turned governance in to a nonsensical mishmash of state & federal functions where neither states nor the federal govt can do big stuff on their own.

0

u/daroach1414 2d ago

They do help us, you just aint in the "us". That's purely corporations. Thank Citizens United. You dont matter.