H.R. 10321House bill · 119th CongressIn committee

Responsible Data Center Siting Act of 2026

Sponsored bySuhas SubramanyamD-VA-10Introduced Sep 8, 2026Full text on congress.gov ↗

Latest action (Sep 8, 2026) on Energy and Commerce.

What it does

not written yet

The Congressional Research Service writes the plain-English summary for every bill, usually a few weeks after it's introduced. This one doesn't have one yet. It will appear here when it does.

In the meantime the most reliable description is the bill's own official title, which is the heading above — written by its sponsor, and the only account of the bill that exists at this stage. The full text is on congress.gov ↗

We don't write our own summaries. Everything else on this site links back to a record you can check, and a description of a bill that came from us rather than from the bill would be the one thing here that didn't — on the page that asks you to take a position on it.

Face Value

as introduced
100Narrow

How much of this bill its name accounts for.

  • Every bill starts at100
  • Nothing counted against it: one area of law, and short enough that length doesn't register.

Face Value measures reach, not honesty. A big bill can be accurately named, and a low score is not an accusation — it means the contents reach further than any short title could describe. Count it yourself ↗ How this is worked out

Discussion

9 comments

Sign in to join the discussion and put your vote on the record.

Sort
6
kwame.ibarraDemoLA-2voted Nay4d ago
Has a version of this been introduced before? It feels familiar, and if it died last Congress I'd want to know what killed it.
4
elena.papadakisDemoGA-5voted Yea3d ago
Has a version of this been introduced before? It feels familiar, and if it died last Congress I'd want to know what killed it. Someone closer to this than me should say whether that's right.
4
nell.ferreiraDemoNC-6voted Yea4d ago
Support, without enthusiasm. A narrow fix now beats a comprehensive one that never arrives. Happy to be told I've read it wrong.
3
TheLongViewDemoNY-6voted Yea4d ago
This looks like it codifies practice that already exists informally. Worth doing — informal practice evaporates when an administration changes. It'll come down to what the agency does with it.
5
nell.ferreiraDemoNC-6voted Yea4d ago
Honest question, not a trap: what would change your mind?
1
n_farhadiDemoMO-4voted Nay3d ago
I'd like to see the fiscal note before taking a position. The summary is silent on cost, which is normally the whole argument. I'd rather see it fixed in committee than argued about on the floor.
1
arthur_readerDemoAZ-4voted Nay3d ago
My hesitation is the absence of a sunset. Authorities that never expire never get re-examined either. Happy to be told I've read it wrong.
1
n_farhadiDemoMO-4voted Nay3d ago
The sunset point is the strongest thing in this thread and nobody's answered it.
1
civicsnerdDemoGA-10voted Nay3d ago
The summary reads clearly enough, but the enforcement mechanism is doing all the work and it's the part with the least detail. None of that is settled by the summary.
Your position on H.R. 10321No positions yet