The Department of Defense’s leasing of land to private companies for artificial intelligence server farms is drawing bipartisan scrutiny from lawmakers worried about the impact on military installations and surrounding communities.
The Pentagon is building data centers to supercharge its war tactics with drone swarms and other technologies powered by AI. Members of Congress — including a senior Republican appropriator — are trying to check that effort before it accelerates any further.
“As we enter the period of AI, which requires very serious data centers, data facilities, that are extraordinary consumers of both energy and water, the question arises as to whether they should be on military bases,” Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.) said last month after proposing a sweeping amendment to the House’s version of the fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act.
“The answer to this may be yes, may be no,” said Garamendi, ranking member of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness.
DOD officials and some congressional conservatives are pushing back, saying the military has already accounted for the impact of data centers. They also warn restriction would create a drag for military innovation at a time when the Pentagon is scrambling to stay competitive in the AI arms race.
But despite the administration’s resistance, some proposals are advancing and could become law as part of broader legislative battles over how to regulate the data center boom.
In many cases, lawmaker proposals addressing DOD data centers don’t seek to shut down the build-out. Most of them would simply require studies, evaluations or additional planning that would force the Pentagon to take into account — and be transparent about — proposed data centers’ consumption of energy and water, as well as the impacts they could have on local communities and the environment.
“Members … understandably want to ensure there is careful consideration of impacts to local residents with regards to potential strain on the power grid and water supplies,” Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), chair of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, said in a statement.
The military’s data center drive gained momentum last year with President Donald Trump’s executive order directing the agency to identify suitable sites on military installations for AI infrastructure. The order required EPA and the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality to take steps to support data center construction.
Since then, the Air Force has offered up unused land on five installations for private companies to build data centers. The Army has already entered into two conditional agreements with private companies to build “commercial hyperscaled data centers” on its installations, the branch said in a news release.
The investment firm Carlyle Group will build a data facility on 1,384 acres on Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas, by 2027. Data center developer CyrusOne will build a facility on 1,201 acres on Utah’s Dugway Proving Ground by 2029, according to an Army fact sheet.
The Army has stated that the projects will come at “no upfront cost to taxpayers,” and that they will include “comprehensive behind-the-meter power and water solutions.”
But some lawmakers — mostly Democrats — are skeptical that can be done. El Paso Matters reported earlier this year that the Fort Bliss data center alone could require more power than all of El Paso’s 460,000 electricity customers combined.
Lawmakers say they have been left in the dark with regard to how these contracts will be enforced and what steps the Pentagon is taking, if any, to ensure the data centers do not create problems for military readiness, base infrastructure and nearby residents.
“Just like any other data center, we have to be very cognizant of water and of electricity,” said Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.), whose district is home to a major Marine Corps base. “A bigger concern is that we haven’t received the appropriate brief from [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth or the Defense Department about any of this.”
A DOD press officer acknowledged a request for information from POLITICO but did not provide comment.
‘Defend our people’
Lawmakers kicked off their data center amendment spree in the spring, with the House Appropriations Committee’s markup of Republicans’ fiscal 2027 Energy-Water funding bill.
A bipartisan amendment package, approved by voice vote, added language advising the Department of Energy to mitigate data centers’ impacts on energy and water usage, grid reliability, and ratepayers.
“This Congress has an obligation to defend our people — not stick our heads in the sand or pretend it’s 1946,” Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), ranking member on the House Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee, said while discussing the proliferation of data centers and rising electricity bills.
When House appropriators marked up their Defense spending bill — which is separate but related to the NDAA — they adopted a Republican package of amendments from Calvert, the top Republican appropriator on defense issues, that contained a provision acknowledging that data centers “place significant strain on energy and water resources and communities have resisted such projects.”
That provision would require DOD to brief Congress on the impacts that military data centers would have on nearby communities, before construction begins. Calvert said his proposal is part of the committee’s regular efforts to conduct oversight over DOD programs.
Republican appropriators rejected several Democratic amendments to the Defense spending bill, including one from Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) that would have prohibited the construction of AI data centers on federal lands, including military installations. She introduced that amendment as a standalone bill this week.
One from Rep. Hillary Scholten (D-Mich.) would have updated minimum efficiency standards for DOD data centers to minimize water use. Scholten also plans to roll out a bill version of her amendment.
“The federal government can lead in innovation while also protecting our water and energy resources,” Scholten said in a statement.
Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.) got a provision into the House NDAA, which passed the chamber this week, that would bar DOD from providing land to data centers that contain “significant components” manufactured by U.S. adversaries.
House Armed Services Republicans rejected Garamendi’s amendment during their NDAA markup. It would have required DOD to make a number of determinations about the impacts of data centers on military installations before related deals are finalized. DOD would also have to evaluate the proposed data centers’ energy and water consumption, noise and light pollution, and effects on security and supply chains.
In the Senate Armed Services Committee, Republicans defeated a Democratic amendment to block DOD from leasing land for data centers until the agency finalizes a data center strategy, required in the underlying bill text.
Both chambers will work on reconciling their versions of the defense authorization and spending bills before the end of the year, perhaps after the November elections.
More broadly on data centers, the House Energy and Commerce Committee is pushing the Ratepayer Protection Act, H.R. 9340, to prevent data center development from raising power prices. It’s unclear whether the Senate will take it up.
Warnings from DOD
Some Republicans and the Pentagon have criticized data center legislative proposals focused on the military, which they say could slow down DOD’s ambitions.
An unnamed Army official told the Federal News Network that Mills’ provision would create an “unworkable standard.” The official said the amendment could drive commercial partners “away from Army land” and cause the military to fall behind adversaries in the sprint for advanced AI capabilities.
Rep. Pat Harrigan (R-N.C.), a House Armed Services member, said he thinks proposals like Garamendi’s are well-intentioned, but that they could thwart American AI advancements while adversaries such as China speed ahead.
An alternative, he said, could be for Congress to require DOD to issue annual reports on data center impacts, but not the kind of “precertification” that some Democrats are proposing.
“I don’t think that this amendment actually ends up protecting our bases or our communities; I think it just buries them in paperwork,” said Harrigan.
Wisconsin Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden, also on Armed Services, said he favors putting data centers on military installations if it means having fewer data centers on tillable land that could otherwise be used for crop production.
During committee deliberations on the House NDAA, Garamendi fired back at opponents, telling them that they had missed the point of his proposal. The goal, he said, was not to stop the construction of military data centers, but rather to ensure that DOD accounts for potential impacts.
“Seemingly, the other side doesn’t want to just admit the reality around resource consumption,” said Levin, who has also supported data center amendments. “It’s just not right for every community.”
