Blue Tsunami’s Clearest Takeaway: People Hate Data Centers - The Intercept

America’s data center buildout suffered a resounding defeat in the midterms at all levels of government. Candidates and ballot measures in favor of restricting or altogether stopping the development of the facilities powering the artificial intelligence boom won overwhelmingly on election night.

Newly elected Democratic governors in Georgia, Ohio, and Texas have promised moratoriums on new data center construction and all took tougher stances on regulation than their incumbent Republican opponents. The trend carried over in various congressional races, in which candidates who were critical of their competitors’ record of promoting data center development came out on top, even flipping key districts in Ohio and South Carolina. 

Many local communities, mostly in Ohio and Illinois, voted directly on their AI concerns and passed a flurry of ballot initiatives restricting data center development — close to 40 proposals, according to a tracker by research firm Redbud Consulting.

“What’s good for the AI industry is clearly not good for average voters,” said Shobita Parthasarathy, a public policy professor at the University of Michigan. “I wish that data center operators and the AI industry really take this as a sign that they’re done a very poor job of considering public concern and taking it seriously.”

Parthasarathy pointed out that many Americans are now deciding how they feel about these energy-guzzling facilities based on their experience of living near one and “real knowledge” about their deficiencies. Those concerns range from negative impacts on energy bills, to the environmental and health issues, but also include anger toward the outsized power that the tech oligarchy wields. 

Americans’ vote in the midterms has given them a tangible way to fight back, Parthasarathy said: Blocking the brick-and-mortar, water-sucking, heat-spewing buildings that power tech billionaires’ rapid wealth accumulation.

A long track record of polls have recorded Americans’ anger about data centers. About three-quarters of voters polled by NBC News on Election Day said they opposed building these facilities in their communities. Those sentiments are consistent with a Heatmap survey from August that found a similar proportion of Americans would strongly oppose a new data center near where they live. 

More than half the voters polled by NBC this week said AI and data centers were a crucial or major factor in their decision, though they were almost equally divided when it came to deciding which party would be better at addressing their AI concerns. 

The AI industry tried to make a dent in the midterms, but much of their money was focused on a congressional primary in New York, where the cash helped defeat AI critic Alex Bores. 

In the general election, an Intercept analysis found, AI super PACs dramatically scaled back their spending on congressional races compared to primaries amid growing anger toward data centers; only 5 percent of their direct expenditures went toward contested general election races. Industry observers told The Intercept that this suggested developers and tech CEOs have taken note of the electorate souring on AI and data centers.

That’s not to say that tech magnates, more broadly, have been stingy with their money. Elon Musk spent nearly $450 million ahead of the midterms, including more than $200 million in Texas, where his companies are headquartered. 

“It shows when an issue is deeply and broadly felt by American people, no amount of money can change their minds.”

“If Elon Musk wants to continue to burn half a million dollars to get no results, there are probably other ways he can do that,” said Mitch Jones, deputy director of Food & Water Action, which has advocated for regulations on data centers on the federal, state, and local level. “It shows when an issue is deeply and broadly felt by American people, no amount of money can change their minds.”

Musk’s money wasn’t enough for the races in Texas to go his way. Surprise upsets in the state’s Senate and gubernatorial races resulted in victories for, respectively, Democrats James Talarico and Gina Hinojosa. 

Talarico promised to end tax breaks for data center developers and minimum federal requirements to protect the grid, environment, jobs, and transparency. Hinojosa called for a moratorium on all data center approvals “until laws can be passed by the Legislature to protect Texans.” Outgoing Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott had already temporarily halted environmental permitting and grid connections until about the end of the year, but Hinojosa’s proposal would last longer and be more expansive.

Congress’s new incoming class includes many Democrats who have promised to rein in the harms of AI. Ohio’s Democratic Sen.-elect Sherrod Brown flipped a district after portraying his opponent in ads as cheerleading the data center industry.

In typically red South Carolina, Democratic Sen.-elect Annie Andrews defeated her opponent, Sen. Darline Graham, after accusing her of being bought by developers. Pro-AI super PAC Building the Future spent $2.5 million to support Graham, according to Politico. 

In Mississippi, Democrat Scott Colom, who called for a temporary ban on data centers, was narrowly ahead of his incumbent opponent on Wednesday evening in a state that has not elected a Democrat to the Senate in more than four decades. 

Just because Trump is expected to veto Democrats’ proposals to regulate AI, that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t push for them, said Jones, of Food & Water Action. He’s hoping Congress will approve a ban on “artificial superintelligence,” as well as a federal moratorium on new data centers. 

“They should show the American public they are standing with us and taking actions to force Trump to veto those bills,” Jones said.

Although moratoriums typically target new construction and not existing data centers, Jones says they are still necessary to prevent an even more expansive buildout. 

“We don’t need any more,” he said, citing a Forbes estimate that the total cost of the projected buildout ranges from $2.8 trillion by 2030 to $10.30 trillion by 2032 in the U.S.

With Trump still in charge, states led by Democratic governors may be where more forceful regulation on data centers occurs. 

In Georgia, Democratic Gov.-elect Keisha Lance Bottoms promised a temporary statewide pause on data centers. Ohio’s new incoming Democratic Gov.-elect Amy Acton proposed an “immediate moratorium upon taking office on any new construction.” And in Kansas, Democrat Cindy Holscher, who declared victory in the gubernatorial race, has advocated for halting new development.  

We’re independent of corporate interests — and powered by members. Join us.

Original reporting. Fearless journalism. Delivered to you. Will you take the next step to support our independent journalism by becoming a member of The Intercept?

By signing up, I agree to receive emails from The Intercept and to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Local communities are getting creative, too. Jones said that some towns and cities have turned to ballot measures to bypass “elected officials who are not keeping pace with their voters.”

About half of the roughly 40 ballot measures in the midterms were in Ohio. Most succeeded by a wide margin, and as of Thursday morning, all but one vote were in favor of restrictions, according to Redbud Consulting’s tracker.

Nick Owens, who helped draft 10 local ballot measures in Ohio that restrict data center development after an unsuccessful attempt at a statewide petition, said this gave voters quicker and easier access to the ballot to curtail the “humongous growth of hyperscale data centers.”

“Communities know how best they want to govern themselves,” said Owens, who was a Trump delegate at the 2024 Republican National Convention and is currently co-founder of grassroots group Conserve Ohio. The results “just validated everything I’ve been seeing on the ground, talking to people, and in nationwide polling,” he added. 

Owens is looking ahead, once again, toward pushing for a statewide moratorium, as well as curtailing the secretive use of non-disclosure agreements by tech companies and developers. 

“They might move into localities where there is less organized pushback.”

Parthasarathy, the public policy professor, said more communities may explore ballot measures as a response to developers’ lack of transparency and drive to build more. 

“I don’t think their thirst for data centers is going to go away,” she said. “They might move into localities where there is less organized pushback.”

What we’re seeing right now from Donald Trump is a full-on authoritarian takeover of the U.S. government. 

Court orders are being ignored. MAGA loyalists have been put in charge of the military and federal law enforcement agencies. The Department of Government Efficiency has stripped Congress of its power of the purse. News outlets that challenge Trump have been banished or put under investigation.

Yet far too many are still covering Trump’s assault on democracy like politics as usual, with flattering headlines describing Trump as “unconventional,” “testing the boundaries,” and “aggressively flexing power.” 

The Intercept has long covered authoritarian governments, billionaire oligarchs, and backsliding democracies around the world. We understand the challenge we face in Trump and the vital importance of press freedom in defending democracy.

IT’S BEEN A DEVASTATING year for journalism — the worst in modern U.S. history.

We have a president with utter contempt for truth aggressively using the government’s full powers to dismantle the free press. Corporate news outlets have cowered, becoming accessories in Trump’s project to create a post-truth America. Right-wing billionaires have pounced, buying up media organizations and rebuilding the information environment to their liking.

In this most perilous moment for democracy, The Intercept is fighting back. But to do so effectively, we need to grow.

That’s where you come in. Will you help us expand our reporting capacity in time to hit the ground running in 2026?

I’M BEN MUESSIG, The Intercept’s editor-in-chief. It’s been a devastating year for journalism — the worst in modern U.S. history.

We have a president with utter contempt for truth aggressively using the government’s full powers to dismantle the free press. Corporate news outlets have cowered, becoming accessories in Trump’s project to create a post-truth America. Right-wing billionaires have pounced, buying up media organizations and rebuilding the information environment to their liking.

In this most perilous moment for democracy, The Intercept is fighting back. But to do so effectively, we need to grow.

That’s where you come in. Will you help us expand our reporting capacity in time to hit the ground running in 2026?