The November 3 midterm results gave Democrats full control of Congress, setting the stage for what could be one of the most divided US governments this decade, with Republicans in the White House.
Tuesday’s results suggest that anger over data centers, the large facilities that house the computers powering AI, is becoming a political force. With Democrats now controlling Congress, that could lead to new limits on where data centers can be built and how much influence local communities can have.
Data centers have become a voting topic in various states. An NBC exit poll showed how concerned voters are about AI: More than half of respondents believe AI will do more harm than good, while nearly 80% are against building data centers in their neighborhoods. Meanwhile, nearly 60% said data centers were a crucial or major factor in their vote. Nadine Smith, president and CEO of the racial justice organization Color of Change, called Tuesday’s election a referendum on “who this economy is built for.”
“National security is important,” Smith said, referring to a common argument among data center advocates that infrastructure is essential for the United States to stay ahead in war and in its rivalry with China. “So are families in South Memphis who breathe exhaust from gas turbines powering an AI supercomputer.” (She was referring to xAI’s data center in Memphis, Tennessee, which uses gas turbines to generate electricity.)
Voters in several states have opposed the development of AI, even as pro-AI super PACs have spent millions hoping to sway them in the midterms. The anti-data center backlash has been particularly felt in states like Ohio, where OpenAI is planning a $500 billion data center, backed by more than $100 billion in funding from Nvidia. In fact, Ohio County, where Meta had planned a 700,000 square foot facility, just banned data centers, and local communities across the state voted overwhelmingly against data center construction measures.
Morgan Stanley analysts predict that Democratic Governor-elect Amy Acton will also pose a major risk to Ohio’s data center construction. Elsewhere, candidates from Texas, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, Georgia and South Carolina all won seats after taking a stand against rapid data center construction. “It’s clear that money doesn’t buy results,” said Anshi Bhatt, a technology and policy researcher, adding that in modern politics, creating a “local villain” is a way to build campaign momentum.
Likely next steps include more construction moratoriums or requiring data centers to pay for their own power grid upgrades instead of passing those costs on to neighboring communities. Goldman Sachs is actually predicting delays in data center construction in states like Georgia and Texas due to Democratic gains.
Democratic control of Congress could also improve the chances of bills like the one Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez introduced earlier this year, although any such bill would also face a possible veto. It proposes a national moratorium on new data centers until Congress adds new guardrails and ensures that construction will not increase electricity costs, harm the environment or proceed without community approval.
There are also bills like the GRID Savings Act, proposed by New Mexico Senator Martin Heinrich, which would prevent network infrastructure costs from being passed on to communities when building large AI data centers.
The environment is also a major concern, particularly at xAI’s Memphis data center and data centers in Virginia, known as the data center capital of the world, where gas turbines are used to generate electricity. Maia Woluchem, program director at Data & Society, a nonprofit research group, believes changes to energy regulations, land rights and other environmental policies could affect data center construction, especially as congressional Democrats take a closer look at the Trump administration’s rollback of some energy protections, as The New York Times reported.
“Regardless of federal action, I can imagine that we will see additional movements at the state and local level, given the momentum that has been building from the ground up,” Woluchem continued, citing as an example Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa, who supports a statewide moratorium on data centers. Hinojosa and Gov. Greg Abbott have both called for some limits, but Hinojosa has focused much of his campaign on opposition to data centers, a notable choice in Texas, whose power grid has proven vulnerable over the past decade.
But the hardest part is yet to come. Smith, for example, now expects a fight, if not more executive orders, to get around what Congress is now likely to block. “Even among Democrats, a blanket freeze is contested,” she said, referring to fears among some Democrats that a moratorium could slow AI progress and harm national security.
She also expects AI lobbyists to start calling lawmakers. “Democrats have sought to make Big Tech pay,” Smith said. “Our job is to make sure they remember it once the cameras leave.”
The backlash runs deeper than the buildings themselves, which are not new. A private equity executive recently told me that people don’t necessarily hate data centers, but rather AI, and that data centers have become a substitute for people’s fears and anxieties about technology. “It seems like the results indicate real frustration with technological power, at a minimum,” Woluchem said, noting that this is also a bipartisan issue.
Over the past month, people have expressed concern to me about the impact of data centers on the environment and their lack of control over their construction.
Amazon, for example, built a data center in Gilroy, California, without the knowledge of many residents, adhering to a 45-year-old zoning law. Vague or outdated zoning laws, as well as the requirement that local officials sign nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) prohibiting them from discussing data center projects, have only fueled public outrage over the construction. Data centers also received billions in tax breaks, and although many tech companies touted the benefits, such as jobs and community programs, for many people it simply wasn’t enough.
People want to know that they still have a say in what happens in their community. Many also fear that AI development will mainly enrich a few wealthy people while their communities suffer and the cost of living rises.
“If AI infrastructure is truly a national priority, then the companies building it can afford to pay for their own electricity, meet clean air standards, disclose what they use, and build with the consent of the people who live next to it,” Smith said. “Families should never subsidize the richest corporations in history through their utility bills. »
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This does not affect our editorial independence.
Gn bussni
