The interim results on Nov. 3 gave Democrats full control of Congress, put Republicans in the White House, and set the stage for what could be one of the most divided U.S. governments in a decade.
Tuesday’s results suggest that anger over data centers, the large facilities that house the computers that power AI, is becoming a political force. With Democrats now in control of Congress, there could be new restrictions on where data centers can be built and where local communities can have a say.
Data centers have become an issue at the ballot box in various states. NBC exit polls showed how concerned voters are about AI. More than half of respondents believe AI will do more harm than good, while nearly 80% oppose building data centers in their neighborhood. Meanwhile, nearly 60% said data centers were an important or primary factor in their vote. Nadine Smith, president and CEO of the racial justice group Color of Change, described Tuesday’s election as a referendum on “who this economy is built for.”
“National security is important,” Smith said, noting a common argument among data center advocates that infrastructure is essential to giving the United States an advantage in war and competition with China. “Families in South Memphis are similarly breathing in exhaust from the gas turbines that power their AI supercomputers.” (She was referring to xAI’s data center in Memphis, Tennessee, which uses gas turbines for power.)
Voters in several states opposed the AI boost, even though pro-AI super PACs spent millions of dollars in hopes of swaying them in this midterm election. The anti-data center backlash was especially felt in states like Ohio, where OpenAI was eyeing a $500 billion data center construction project backed by more than $100 billion in loans from NVIDIA. In fact, a data center ban was just passed in Ohio, where Meta was planning a 700,000 square foot facility, and local communities in the state overwhelmingly voted against the data center expansion.
Morgan Stanley analysts predict that Democratic Gov.-elect Amy Acton will also pose a significant risk to data center construction in Ohio. Elsewhere, candidates in Texas, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, Georgia and South Carolina won seats after taking a stand against the rapid expansion of data centers. “It’s clear that money doesn’t buy results,” said technology and policy researcher Ansi Bhatt, adding that in modern politics, creating “local villains” is one way to boost campaign momentum.
Perhaps next steps include a moratorium on further construction or requiring data centers to pay for power grid upgrades themselves rather than passing them on to neighboring communities. In fact, Goldman Sachs predicts that a Democratic victory will delay data center construction in states such as Georgia and Texas.
Democratic control of Congress could also increase the chances of passing legislation like the one introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez earlier this year, although such legislation could also be vetoed. The bill proposes a nationwide moratorium on new data centers until Congress adds new guardrails to ensure construction does not proceed without raising electricity costs, harming the environment, or without community approval.
There are also bills, like the Grid Savings Act proposed by New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich, which would prevent grid infrastructure costs from being passed on to local communities during the construction of large AI data centers.
The environment is also a major concern, particularly at xAI’s data centers in Memphis and across Virginia, known as the Data Center Capital of the World, which use gas turbines for power. Maia Walchem, program director at Data & Society, a nonprofit research group, believes changes in energy regulations, land rights and other environmental policies could impact data center construction, especially as Congressional Democrats further consider reversing certain energy protection policies from the Trump administration, as reported by the New York Times.
“Regardless of federal action, given the momentum building from the ground up, I can imagine we will see further movement at the state and local level,” Walchem continued, citing Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa, who supports a statewide data center moratorium, as an example. Both Mr. Hinojosa and Gov. Greg Abbott have called for some restrictions, but Mr. Hinojosa has focused much of his campaign against data centers, a notable option in Texas, where the power grid has proven weak over the past decade.
But the hard part is yet to come. For example, Smith now expects a fight to avoid what Congress is trying to block, or even more executive orders. “Even among Democrats, there is opposition to a complete freeze,” he said, noting that some Democrats are concerned that a moratorium could slow progress in AI and undermine national security.
He also expects AI lobbyists to start calling lawmakers. “Democrats ran with making Big Tech pay,” Smith said. “Our job is to make sure they remember that even after the cameras leave.”
The repulsion is deeper than the building itself, which is not new. A private equity executive recently told me that people don’t necessarily hate data centers, but rather that they hate AI, and that data centers have become a proxy for people’s fears and anxieties about technology. “This result at least seems to indicate a real dissatisfaction with the power of technology,” Walchem said, noting that this is also a bipartisan issue.
Over the past month, people have told me they’re concerned about the environmental impact of data centers and that they don’t have a say in whether they get built.
Amazon, for example, built a data center in Gilroy, Calif., without the knowledge of many residents, by satisfying a 45-year-old zoning law. Ambiguous or outdated zoning laws and a requirement that local officials sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) barring them from discussing data center projects only fueled public anger over the construction. Data centers also received billions of dollars in tax breaks, and many tech companies have touted benefits such as jobs and community programs for many people, but it’s not enough.
People want to know that they still have a say in what happens in their communities. Many also fear that increased AI will primarily enrich the wealthy few while hurting their communities and raising the cost of living.
“If AI infrastructure is truly a national priority, the companies that build it can afford to pay for their own electricity, meet clean air standards, disclose what they are using, and build it with the buy-in of the people living next to them,” Smith said. “Families should never subsidize the richest corporation in history through their utility bills.”
If you make a purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This does not affect editorial independence.
