🏛️ Issues and Advocacy Training
Courses › Energy, AI and Data Center Policy: What the Orders Say

Lesson 5 of 9 · about 17 minutes

Who Is Behind It: Officials, Agencies, Companies and Money

You'll be able to

  • Name the officials and agencies the orders put in charge, using the titles in the documents
  • Identify the companies selected for federal data center sites and those that signed the ratepayer pledge
  • Describe the main political groups spending on AI policy and who funds them
  • Explain why the AI preemption fight does not split neatly by party

An executive order names jobs, not people. "The Secretary of Energy shall" survives a cabinet change. So the first table below uses the titles in the documents and the person who held each one when the document was signed or acted on, with a date. People change jobs. Check before you write that someone still holds a post.

The officials the orders put in charge

Role in the documentsPerson, with the dated actionWhat the orders give this office
PresidentDonald J. TrumpSigns every order; declared the energy emergency (Jan 2025) and the bulk-power emergency (Aug 2026)
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (OSTP Director)Michael Kratsios, signer of the AI Action Plan (Jul 2025)Leads the Genesis Mission across agencies; co-drafts the federal preemption bill under EO 14365; drafts a legal definition of "Super Intelligence" under EO 14434
Special Advisor for AI and CryptoDavid Sacks, signer of the AI Action Plan (Jul 2025)Consulted on which state laws to challenge and which grants to condition; co-drafts the preemption bill
Assistant to the President for National Security AffairsMarco Rubio, signer of the AI Action Plan (Jul 2025)Security pillar of the plan; routes emergency recommendations
Secretary of EnergyChris Wright, who announced the four DOE sites (Jul 2025) and signed the PJM principles (Jan 2026)Vice chair of the energy council; 202(c) emergency orders; DOE site leases; runs Genesis; enforces EO 14421 on grid equipment
Secretary of the InteriorDoug Burgum, who signed the PJM principles (Jan 2026)Chairs the National Energy Dominance Council; offers Interior land for data centers under EO 14318
Secretary of CommerceCommerce Department, through NTIA and NISTFinancing initiative for data center projects; evaluation of state AI laws; broadband funding conditions; AI export program
Attorney GeneralTask force set up by Attorney General memorandum, Jan 9, 2026AI Litigation Task Force to challenge state AI laws; priority prosecution of AI-assisted hacking under EO 14409
Secretary of the ArmyDan Driscoll, who announced the Fort Bliss and Dugway selections (Mar 2026)Base land leases for data centers under EO 14318 section 9(b)
NSA Director, with CISA and TreasuryOffices named in EO 14409 (Jun 2026)Classified benchmark that decides which AI models are "covered frontier models"
OMB DirectorOffice named in EO 14319 and EO 14365Procurement guidance for "unbiased" AI (M-26-04); funding conditions

Independent agencies also have assigned parts: the FTC (a policy statement on when state AI rules are preempted), the FCC (a possible federal AI disclosure standard), FERC (cost recovery for emergency plant orders), and the NRC (the 18-month reactor decision limit). Independent agencies have traditionally kept more distance from the White House than cabinet departments. EO 14215, "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" (February 18, 2025), asserts presidential supervision over them, and how far that reaches is itself contested.

The companies with a stake

Several firms now hold or are negotiating federal deals that flow from these orders.

DealCompaniesSource and date
Savannah River Site AI data center and 2 GW of generationAmentum, with DC BLOX as digital infrastructure partnerWorld Nuclear News, Jul 2026
Paducah 1.8 GW AI campusBrookfield, with NextEra for gas generation and batteriesGovConWire, Oct 2026
Fort Bliss data centerCarlyleU.S. Army, Mar 2026
Dugway Proving Ground data centerCyrusOne, held by funds managed by KKR and BlackRockU.S. Army, Mar 2026
Ratepayer Protection PledgeAmazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle, xAIPerkins Coie summary of the Mar 4, 2026 proclamation

The hyperscalers' spending is covered in Who Builds Them. Note the overlap: the same seven companies that pledged to pay their own way are among the biggest buyers of the power, chips and equipment the orders aim to speed up.

The money in the regulation fight

AI companies and their founders became major political spenders in the 2026 cycle. Axios mapped the main groups in February 2026:

  • Leading the Future backs fast AI development and lighter regulation. It raised $50.1 million in 2025 per FEC filings and announced it had raised more than $125 million for the midterms. Donors include OpenAI president Greg Brockman, Joe Lonsdale of 8VC, Andreessen Horowitz, Ron Conway of SV Angel, and Perplexity AI. An affiliated 501(c)(4), Build American AI, does not disclose donors.
  • Meta-backed PACs: the American Technology Excellence Project, with $45 million from Meta, and two party-specific PACs, Forge the Future and Making Our Tomorrow, with $65 million combined per the New York Times. Meta has said it aims to fight state AI bills it considers onerous.
  • Public First Action pushes for AI safety, transparency and oversight. It is led by former Reps. Brad Carson, a Democrat, and Chris Stewart, a Republican. Its only disclosed donor is Anthropic, at $20 million, and it had raised nearly $50 million by late February, according to the New York Times as cited by Axios.

A disclosure, since it matters here: these lessons were drafted with help from Claude, an AI model made by Anthropic. The figures above come from Axios and are reported the same way for every group.

Example: sizing the two sides

  • Lighter-regulation groups: Leading the Future $125 million (announced as raised) + Meta-backed PACs $45 million + $65 million = $235 million.
  • Stronger-oversight group: Public First, nearly $50 million raised.
  • Ratio: 235 / 50 = 4.7 to 1.

Caveats belong next to the number: two figures are announced or reported fundraising totals, two are Meta's contributions, and they date from different weeks. Check FEC filings at fec.gov for the latest. The ratio is rough, but the direction is clear.

Why the fight does not split by party

The preemption question cuts across party lines, and the record shows it.

  • In July 2025 the Senate stripped a 10-year moratorium on enforcing state AI laws out of the budget reconciliation bill by a vote of 99 to 1.
  • The Great American AI Act, a June 4, 2026 discussion draft that would preempt state laws on how AI models are developed for three years, has bipartisan authors: Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-CA), Lori Trahan (D-MA), Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA), Scott Franklin (R-FL), Scott Peters (D-CA) and Erin Houchin (R-IN). It had not been filed as a bill as of late September 2026, per CASRAI's tracker.
  • In July 2026, more than 200 state lawmakers and labor groups including the Association of Flight Attendants urged Congress to reject preemption, per the same tracker.
  • On energy, Democratic Governors Josh Shapiro and Wes Moore joined the administration's January 2026 PJM principles, while 17 states are suing over the energy emergency in State of Washington v. Trump.

So a candidate's party tells you less than you might expect. Ask the specific question: does this person support federal preemption of state AI laws, and with what carve-outs?

Common mix-ups

  • Claim: All of big tech wants no AI rules. What the evidence shows: Leading the Future and Meta's PACs push lighter rules; Anthropic funds a group pushing for oversight. Companies differ.
  • Claim: Preemption is a Republican position and state AI laws are a Democratic one. What the evidence shows: The Senate's 99 to 1 vote and the bipartisan draft bill show both parties are split.
  • Claim: An official named in a 2025 order still holds the job. What the evidence shows: Orders assign titles. Verify who holds each post on the date you write.

Reporting angle

  • Search FEC filings for Leading the Future, its affiliates, Public First and the Meta PACs. List spending in your state's congressional races and what the ads actually say.
  • Ask every federal and legislative candidate the same written question about AI preemption and publish all answers side by side.
  • Check your state's campaign finance database for AI company and PAC spending in legislative races, especially for members of committees that hear AI bills.
  • For any company bidding on a federal site in your state, look up its lobbying disclosures at the Senate Lobbying Disclosure database.

Research angle

Check yourself

1. Under EO 14213, who chairs the National Energy Dominance Council?

2. According to Axios (February 2026), who is the only disclosed donor to Public First Action, the group pushing for AI safety rules?

3. When the Senate voted in July 2025 on removing a 10-year moratorium on state AI law enforcement from the budget reconciliation bill, what was the result?

4. Which agency head does EO 14365 make responsible for the AI Litigation Task Force?

5. Using the Axios figures, Leading the Future announced it had raised more than $125 million and Meta-backed PACs about $110 million, while Public First reportedly had raised nearly $50 million. Roughly how many dollars favor lighter regulation for each dollar favoring stronger oversight?

Terms in this lesson

OSTP
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, headed by the President's science adviser, who carries the title Assistant to the President for Science and Technology.
National Energy Dominance Council
A council in the Executive Office of the President created by EO 14213 to coordinate energy permitting, production and policy.
Super PAC
A political committee that can raise and spend unlimited money on independent political activity but cannot coordinate with candidates.
501(c)(4)
A nonprofit 'social welfare' organization that can do some political activity and does not have to disclose its donors.

Full glossary

Sources