Opinion > Opinions - Technology The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill Florida has it right: No handouts for AI robber barons by Tony Vanderhoef, opinion contributor - 02/28/26 1:00 PM ET by Tony Vanderhoef, opinion contributor - 02/28/26 1:00 PM ET Share ✕ LinkedIn LinkedIn Email Email A data center owned by Amazon Web Services, front right, is under construction next to the Susquehanna nuclear power plant in Berwick, Pa., Jan. 14, 2025. (AP Photo/Ted Shaffrey, File) Florida is moving aggressively to position itself as a hub for innovation, including artificial intelligence. But as the state considers how to regulate AI and the infrastructure that supports it, one principle should remain nonnegotiable: Families should not be forced to bankroll Big Tech’s growth. That is the core idea behind Gov. Ron DeSantis’s (R)  recent proposal  dealing with the  Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights  and a  bill  that directly regulates data centers. The data center proposal specifically aims to prevent utilities from shifting the infrastructure costs of hyperscale AI data centers onto residential ratepayers. It would also bar taxpayer subsidies for those facilities and preserve local authority over siting decisions by applying these limits to new contracts and projects.  If it becomes law, the bill would take effect July 1. The message is simple but important: Florida welcomes innovation, but it will not ask families to foot the bill for Big Tech welfare. Subsidizing AI data centers through utilities or tax policy is a hidden transfer from families to Big Tech, and Florida is right to stop it. AI data centers require extraordinary amounts of power, water, and supporting infrastructure. According to a  recent study  by the Environmental and Energy Study Institute, “Large data centers can consume up to 5 million gallons per day, equivalent to the water use of a town populated by 10,000 to 50,000 people.” When those demands are met through regulated utilities or public incentives, the costs rarely stay confined to the project itself. They are spread across rate bases, absorbed into tax policy and ultimately borne by households who never consented to subsidize the private development in the first place. Florida’s proposal draws a clear boundary around who should bear the costs of AI infrastructure. The  legislation  would prohibit utilities from passing data center infrastructure expenses on to residential ratepayers, bar taxpayer subsidies for hyperscale facilities and preserve local authority over siting decisions. In short, it treats AI data centers like any other private industrial project. If a company wants to build one, the company should pay for it. That principle is already being tested in real time. The legislation has already cleared both of its initial Senate committees unanimously and has advanced  to the Rules Committee, as the financial implications will soon come fully into focus. This is the stage where policy rhetoric meets fiscal reality, and where temptation to blur lines or carve out exceptions emerges. That balance matters beyond Florida. States  across the nation  are competing to attract AI investment, and many are turning to indirect subsidies that obscure who ultimately pays. Those arrangements may look painless on paper, but households feel them through higher bills and strained infrastructure long after the ribbon cuttings are over.  A recent Harvard Electricity Law Initiative  paper  warns that utilities may socialize the costs of new power plants and power lines based on the premise that the public benefits, but the surging demand from data centers could force average consumers to subsidize the electricity costs of some of the world’s largest corporations. Florida is choosing a different approach. The  bill  makes clear that utilities may not recover data center infrastructure costs from residential ratepayers, drawing a bright line between private investment and public obligation. By insisting that AI companies internalize their own infrastructure costs and by anchoring consumer protections in statute, the state is drawing a line that other states should study closely.  If artificial intelligence is going to reshape the economy, it should do so on its own merits. Families should not be forced to pay for private expansion through higher bills and back-door subsidies. Florida’s message is clear: Innovation is welcome, but welfare for Big Tech is not. Tony Vanderhoef is a law student at Florida State University and native Floridian. He is a contributor with Young Voices. Add as preferred source on Google Tags AI data center environmental impact AI data centers big tech Big tech companies Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis Hyperscale AI data centers Residential ratepayers Ron DeSantis Taxpa