Rising electric bills and data center construction spark bipartisan pushback from governors, but restricting AI infrastructure could cost America its lead.
Page A10From§Eachthe sunrise edition — 31 August 2026
TV Democrat praised as centrist also works for Big AI, the industry framed as deciding the next president.
As it ran on the front
Here is a sentence you are supposed to read twice before it clicks, so let's read it twice right now. A man goes on cable television, gets introduced as a reasonable, centrist Democrat, tells the reasonable, centrist audience the reasonable, centrist things, and nowhere in the chyron does it mention he draws a paycheck from the artificial intelligence industry. Meanwhile, on the same news cycle, a different outlet is telling you the data center fight — who gets the tax break, who gets the water rights, who gets to build the thing that eats a small city's worth of electricity — could decide the next president of the United States. Put those two stories next to each other and you don't need a conspiracy board with red string. You need reading comprehension.
This is not new. This is the oldest trick in the business, it just changed its wardrobe. Twenty years ago the guy on television not disclosing his industry ties was a pharma consultant talking about drug pricing, or an oil man talking about drilling permits, and everybody eventually figured out the racket and made him wear a little sticker that said 'paid consultant.' AI hasn't gotten its sticker yet. Right now it just gets to be 'centrist,' which is a costume, not a position. Centrist is what you call yourself when you don't want anyone asking who signs the check.…
…(cont) And the check matters here more than usual, because the thing being discussed is not abstract. Data centers use real water, real power, real land, and somebody is deciding, right now, in statehouses and in Congress, who eats that cost and who banks the subsidy. If the guy explaining that fight to the public on television is also collecting money from the winning side of that fight, that's not commentary. That's the industry doing its own PR through a guy with better lighting than their actual lobbyists.
Nobody did anything illegal here. That's the part that should bother you more, not less. This is all disclosed somewhere, in some filing, in some database a reporter had to go dig up, because the disclosure sure wasn't happening on air. The system doesn't need to break the law to work exactly like this. It just needs you not to look at the two stories side by side. So look at them side by side.
“Same guy, same week — cheerleading 'centrist' politics on TV, cashing an AI check off camera. That's not balance, that's a guy reading his own employer's talking points with better hair. Watch what he never criticizes.”
“Industry expertise on the air is a feature, not a conflict — you want pundits who actually understand the technology shaping policy, that's rigor, that's — well, undisclosed rigor, I suppose, if it wasn't disclosed, but that's an oversight, not a strategy.”
The receipts
Former Rep. Max Rose helps lead an influential network intervening in Democratic primaries — while quietly advising a tech-funded political operation targeting AI regulation.
This page is a back-issue: the story as it ran, receipts as they were. The current edition is at the front.