US midterms 2026: Why are voters turning against data centres? | This Is America

This is America, and this is the changing face of Maryland, where massive, energy-hungry data centers are fast appearing on the landscape and becoming one of the biggest talking points of the midterm elections. And it's not just here. Right across the country, even as big tech bosses promise jobs and revenue for states and local authorities, people who are living next to data centers say the reality is such that they don't want any more. In a minute, we'll be asking whether this is the one big unifying issue for a divided electorate and how politicians who previously said yes can now make a U-turn and say no. First, though, let's head down to Washington, D.C., and Alex Marquardt. Thank you, Richard. What was once seen as a shared bipartisan embrace of America's AI infrastructure boom has now turned into one of this midterm cycle's sharpest political divides. In states like Ohio, Texas, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, candidates from both parties are now campaigning against the data centers that they once supported. They cite rising electricity costs, water strain, and, of course, the mounting anger from residents. Now, President Donald Trump warns that the backlash could cost America its edge in the global AI race. Let's go back to Richard Gaisford, who has more from Adamstown, Maryland. Alongside native plants and wildlife, a new invasive species. Data centres rising from the ground, making their mark on Maryland. There are already four big complexes of hyperscale data centres here. And the big question now is how do we regulate them effectively? And how do we prevent a larger sprawl of that industry? Steve Black's a worried man. His farm lies close to a data centre development zone that if fully built would dominate the land around Adamstown. In a jurisdiction like ours where this industry suddenly shows up, their point of pride is how quickly they can go from a bare field to a powered shell, they call it, a powered concrete box. And it's happened very fast here. Recent polling by the University of Maryland shows eight out of ten people living in the state are now against data center development. It's clear as you drive around the area that data centres are the big election issue here. And across the United States, communities are raising their voices. Here in Memphis, protesting against the environmental impact of a data centre development by Elon Musk. Backed by the president, billionaire tech bosses are keen to promote the economic benefits they bring. It is the biggest thing there is, maybe the biggest thing there's ever been. It's much bigger than the Internet. Now, that's already been proved. The Internet was a big thing when it happened. It's creating just an enormous amount of jobs. On top of this infrastructure, several hundred billion dollars of venture capital has gone into creating new companies. And all of those thousands of companies are creating lots and lots of jobs. Bringing their data centers. But many see these jobs as short-lived. creating a cross-party protest movement against unrestricted development of the data centers and artificial intelligence. If there can be nice things coming out of this, this issue, pushback on data centers, is absolutely bipartisan. There are both villains and heroes on both sides of the aisle about this. It's easy to see it as a single issue, it's just data centers, but it's really not. It's government and its relationship with the people, how it listens to the people, government transparency with things like nondisclosure agreements, land planning decisions. Most here had no clue what was coming. In Maryland and across America, politicians who initially backed the plans are now having to rethink their support, public opinion moving against them as quickly as the data centers are built. Richard Gaisford, Al Jazeera, Maryland. All right, let's dig into this hot-button issue with our guest. We have Nicole Turner-Lee. She is the director of the Center for Technology Innovation and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. We also have Sahil Khan. He is a Republican strategist who previously worked at the White House and is also a senior director of external affairs at Microsoft. Sahil, Nicole, thank you both so much for joining me today. This is a really interesting one. When we talk about the midterms, we often talk about affordability and the cost of living, But this really has become a very significant issue for voters on both sides of the aisle. We're seeing candidates on both sides of the aisle having to defend what they have done and what they plan to do. So, Nicole, just bigger picture. How did we get here? How did this become so political? So I think this is an interesting kitchen table conversation, right? What started as a couple of data centers coming into, let's just say, Loudoun County in northern Virginia has now become a national phenomena. People are upset because the first thing they saw was their electricity bill going up. So that was a correlation between the local data center and what was happening with their electricity alongside the rising costs of gas and groceries. So I think there was a political effect that actually happened that was economic at best. I think the other things that we're seeing that are becoming really contentious is that people are property owners. And they're seeing that these data centers are backing up into their, you know, backyards proper. And it's something that is quite disturbing for folks that did not anticipate that they would see this monstrosity showing up, you know, where their kids are jumping on the local trampoline. And I think that's also problematic. And I think the other thing is the messaging. You know, we know in the United States to be competitive that we are going to need data centers and compute infrastructure to at least compete against China. But I do think the local buy-in was not properly mitigated in ways that now it's become a midterm problem. Is this a really bipartisan issue? Is this something that you're really finding that the politicians on both sides alike are having to really figure out how to talk about? And as you were listing off all those things about why people have gotten so angry, that, of course, also seems to be relevant for both Republicans and Democrats. Well, this definitely has become a campaign issue. And you can look all across the country and those candidates that are supporting data centers are essentially being, you know, plummeted and plowed in their local communities because people are just so concerned, whether you're Republican, whether you're Democrat, independent, urban, rural, farmer, you know, a city person. It doesn't matter. This has become the less polarizing issue of the upcoming elections and also an issue, I think, that speaks volumes to the fact that people will unite around a concern that they have when it comes to their property, their cost of living, as well as other things that are important to them. I mean, listen, this is AI. I think the bigger question is people have been listening to the job loss speculation. They've been looking at some of the things happening on the news in terms of safety concerns. It's not helping that candidates that support data centers have that in the backdrop. And they really need to address that as part of a campaign promise going forward. So, Hela, how do you see it on the Republican side? Because, you know, certainly with Trump in charge and really embracing, as we just saw, the subject of AI or superintelligence, as he has started calling it. How are you finding Republicans walk this line of, in this case, in a couple of weeks, having to get reelected in many cases? and answer for both their president, who is so pro-AI, and answer to their constituents? Absolutely. It's been a challenge, no doubt, because the president, of course, has embraced what he calls superintelligence, has already said unequivocally that we have to win this challenge, particularly against China, and that communities that reject data centers are somehow going to be left behind. And that's a little bit too much of a very kind of ham-fisted response to genuine concerns that people, as Nicole articulated, have in local communities. And so Republican candidates are now struggling, particularly those that have a record of having supported data centers in the past, with being responsive to the concerns that are being articulated by their constituents and trying to walk that fine line to say, hey, look, we need to win the race vis-a-vis China. We need to continue to be competitive. But I also need to be responsive to the concerns that local communities, families, these leaders are bringing in when it comes to electricity, water, land use, the placement of these data centers, noise mitigation, and so many other challenges that are being raised when it comes to the local constituents. And really what it is, it's not only about data centers per se. That's definitely part of the problem. But I think you have a growing angst vis-a-vis AI in general, and you have a growing angst about tech leaders and whether they are accountable to local communities in a democratic country. And particularly because you're seeing some tech leaders really embrace this administration. What otherwise wasn't a partisan issue, technology, is becoming increasingly partisan. So when they see people like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos and Larry Ellison and others really putting their arm around the president and the president responding in kind, that's putting their constituents in a tough position because they do have concerns that they want to articulate. They want to be on the right side of history, but on their hand, they also want to protect their families and their communities. I want to dig into a little bit of what these communities are facing, what these community members are saying. There was a community meeting just last night in Woodward, Iowa. This was after Microsoft announced that it would be building a data center in that city of Woodward and had bought some 600 acres of land. There was a lot of anger. Someone was escorted out of that meeting according to a local report. Take a listen. So that was the mayor of Woodward having to answer that constituent's question about whether or not constituents should actually have a vote in this. And the mayor went on to say that essentially, no, the constituents don't have a vote. But Sahel, you do work at Microsoft. This is one of many companies opening and operating these data centers around the country. What would you say to that resident who wants a bigger say in whether a project like the one in Woodward goes through? I think the approach that all companies, including Microsoft, need to continue to take is a community-first approach where they really engage in a very transparent and forthright manner with local communities. Now, ideally, elected officials, mayors, city councilmen, county commissioners, and others are representatives of those constituents, of those residents, and so they are very much part of that conversation. But public hearings, as you saw in Iowa, are part of that process where people need to be able to voice their concerns, ask questions, and have those questions answered. I don't know if you want to have some type of process where you naturally have a referendum. There may be situations where that might be warranted. But there needs to be very open and forthright conversations regardless where Americans have the ability to make their concerns heard and to have those concerns responded to and answered in a very forthright and honest manner. Absolutely. What does that actually look like? So in this case, for example, Woodward, it was a personal private sell to Microsoft of these 600 acres. But as a communications specialist, how do you think the big companies can do better, need to do better in terms of navigating the communication with the residents? Because obviously the politicians have their work cut out for them. But on the private side, obviously there's going to be an effort. There has to be an effort to ingratiate themselves with the communities. I think it's talking to the communities, and that means doing that early, before any, you know, shovel hits dirt, engaging with the communities in a very honest way. You know, unfortunately, some companies have hid behind nondisclosure agreements and have not been as honest that they're going to, in fact, be the company that's coming in to build a facility. So that means from the very beginning, being open to say, hey, look, we want to come to your community, we want to build. You know, what we've seen is that many communities want these centers. And, yes, you are hearing of communities where there are challenges. But there are other communities that have welcomed these data centers because of the job creation, because of the economic activity, because of the net benefit, positive benefit that the data center does bring to a particular community. But that's only because companies have engaged with the communities to spell out what the benefits are prior to any construction being started. started. And so that conversation needs to be honest and forthright. And then the local community leaders, the elected officials, and the company involved can make a decision, an informed decision on whether or not to proceed at a particular locale. Nicole, how do you see it? You know, I think that that's good. I think it's a lesson that we've learned based on the rising concerns that people are showing about data centers. And companies have responded, Microsoft being one of them where they've actually removed nondisclosure agreements and actually come in with a greater transparency. But we have a lot of work to do. I mean, the transparency that communities often see, as you saw in the town hall meeting, is because some of the backroom deals are happening and community residents, by the time they get involved in the process, the deal's already been sealed or the land has been acquired. I think it's really important when we say community first to start with a conversation, one that starts with whether or not a community is even entertaining a data center. The other thing that communities often suffer from as well is they don't have the capacity. There are many communities, particularly rural communities, that have, you know, a limited staff. They can't understand what their current audits are to be able to actually negotiate with a large company. They need some type of intermediary in between who can speak for their interests as well. And I think it's also important for communities to sort of think through this question of what are you willing to trade off and will you get more than the company will actually extract in terms of water and energy and land. And I think for most people that are concerned about the data center debate right now, they need transparency. They need dashboards. They need to know what it looks like in terms of, you know, if you're using clean energy or using something else. And until we get some of that done up front, before the deal is even considered, I think we're going to still see a lot of pushback from local community residents. I do want to talk about those resources in just a second, but what about the benefits? And Suhail was just mentioning there our communities that are welcoming data centers, the economic benefits, and forgive me if this is a dumb question, but when you hear about, say, a defense company that comes to a town that is large and offers all these jobs, let's go back to the case in Woodward. What I understand from local reports is that the data center will offer dozens of jobs. That's not a huge number. So where are these communities benefiting economically and how much? Well, I think that's something that we still need to discuss, right? Because data center companies will come into a local community. As you heard in the tape from that town hall meeting, many of these communities are suffering. They haven't had economic investments in quite some time. This is seen as a way to really regenerate the economy, make sure people are getting engaged, small businesses, new football fields are being built. That school that was, you know, unfunded actually gets done. But those are temporal benefits to communities. Communities need to think long-term. By doing a deal with a data center company, will you have better public infrastructure? Will the jobs be long-standing? We're now seeing community benefit agreements that are putting in place not just the construction promises, but long-term promises when the data center opens. You know, I think the thing that really people struggle with is the reciprocity. Many of these communities, in an effort to get a good deal with the data center, are giving away tax incentives, abatements, you know, making not ordinances, but finding ways to get around some of the ordinances that may be set in stone that may limit the opportunity. But I always tell communities, just ensure that whatever you're doing, you're going to have a long term strategy and you're going to get more than what that data center extracts from your community. For me, that is so important, but you have to have the right people at the table. Communities have to be equipped with some best practices. We need more shared expertise and collaboration where possible, particularly in regional areas. And we need to ensure that the companies that are coming in, they're going to stay for the long haul and we won't have what's called stranded assets when perhaps the big bet on AI doesn't pan out to fruition. And I imagine one of the baseline reassurances that you would expect from these companies is when it comes to at least the water and electricity. And so, Hel, we have seen, I'm going to come back to your company again, to Microsoft vowing to not drive up utility prices. How can companies guarantee that these massive infrastructure projects aren't going to drive up the power bills, suck up the local water? So that when it comes to water, energy, any type of challenge there, really technology is part of the solution for these data centers, because in fact, They can use technology to, in many instances, put more energy into the local communities to bring the costs down for a local community. And that's what we're seeing. Where there are successful data centers, we're finding that the companies, whether they're Microsoft or others, they, in fact, are putting more energy into the grid. They're building out the energy infrastructure to manage that increase in energy usage. Their water management is much more responsible, recycling water, et cetera. Their land use is much more responsible. The noise mitigation is another factor that also affects local communities. And so they're using technology to address those concerns. And again, in a much more forthright, much more transparent manner than in the past to address those concerns on the job creation piece. Yes, there may be a smaller amount of jobs once the data center is built. But what you'll find in community after community that the building and trade unions are very much in support of the construction of these data centers because again those are significant jobs and you're not talking about insignificant investment when it comes to building a data center from a plumber from an electrician pipe fitters and others that really get the revenue that is brought into a local community that they wouldn't otherwise have but for the construction of these facilities and that's not something that can be very uh sustainable for a lot of communities Even you say short-term, you're still talking about the matter of several years. And again, if you're somebody into building trades in a local community that's been hit hard over the years because of changes in demography and the economy, these data centers can be a major boon. And then not to mention the tax revenue that comes that is sustained over years. Loudoun County, which is just a few miles away from where we're sitting, over 40 percent of the tax base of Loudoun County is covered by data centers. So that's not insignificant when it comes to paying for first responders, schools, and other local and city infrastructure. And I think that's so important, too, right? But I think we're also learning lessons in Loudoun County, right, because of the fact that the strain on the grid is actually forcing it to rethink their data center strategy. For those of you that don't know, Loudoun County is data center alley here in the state of Virginia, as well as the fact that the jobs, We want to make sure that people who are local do keep those jobs. But at the same token, find ways where we're also balancing the number of laborers that are imported into communities. Oftentimes we see the other effect, and I've seen this with a lot of data center companies, where hospitality may go up. Hotels and, you know, diners, local diners may have more business. But I think for most people who are looking at this issue and have some contention, they want a bigger narrative. They want a narrative that guarantees success in this American dream that they've been waiting on. And they want one that's less invasive. I mean, part of the reason why many of the farmers are upset is because they buried their dog on some of these lands or a daughter got married in some of those areas. And they see the transmission line as violating some of those things that their family has worked for for so many years. So I think it's one of those issues that we really have to recalibrate, like you said, re-message, and think in ways that it can be a powerful narrative of economic development going forward. What is your take on what Sahil just said about the development of new technology to deal with these resource issues? Because we hear so much frustration with power bills going up and water, especially in arid areas, being used to cool these data centers. Well, it's definitely a problem. I mean, these data centers, I call them, they're plugging into the extension cord into the power grid, and the power grid is already unable to handle the capacity. So we're going to continue to see this corrosiveness when it comes to the ability to handle these data centers, you know, because we haven't placed money the way we should have 30 years ago in the smart grid. I do think that these are concerns that are outside of the AI space. They really should be a national imperative to think about how we are finding new sources of energy. I also think that the other challenge that comes with power is that we need to find more renewable sources, clean energy buys that can actually supplement this. part of the issue is until we solve that concern we're going to continue to see i think a lot of the disjointedness and a lot of the attention placed on the need for more resources but the ability to provide that let's take a look at the the land because of course the rapid growth in AI means that lots of land is needed for all of these data centers that we've been talking about that exist and that are waiting to be built at the moment pre-existing facilities in are in more urban areas that have been converted for data center use. Only 13 percent of facilities currently operating are in rural areas, but 67 percent of the planned future construction is in rural areas. Now, voters, of course, have a range of concerns about that rapid expansion. Take a listen. There's got to be a lot more oversight and probably at some point some legislation just around data centers and AI in general. There's a concern over water and where they're placed and how it's affecting the people living around them. It's not at all obvious whether it is actually good for communities to have a data center in them. More data centers allow people to get more into your business. The power usage to take it up space and things like that. Indefinite data center expansion is like not a super sustainable or useful goal. I am pretty anti-data center because I feel as if the environmental impact hasn't been accurately studied. The way data centers are handled are really important, both environmentally as well as from a community standpoint. I can understand why it might factor in to especially rural America's vote. So, Hal, so much of this, of course, goes beyond this country. There's a real imperative from those in the national security space to make sure that the U.S. doesn't fall behind in this AI race when it comes to China. How critical are these data centers to keeping pace and staying ahead of China? But also, how do you sell that message to people who are so focused on their own community? So you're looking at two issues, actually. It's not only the national security imperative that is very much at the forefront, but you also have a consumer demand. And what you see here is, of course, as with a lot of things in American life, the dichotomy that Americans are raising concerns regarding data centers, particularly data centers, in their communities, by the same token, their demand for the output of data centers is going through the roof. And that's why when you put up that map and you're seeing that right now most of your data centers are in urban communities, but increasingly they'll be moved to rural communities, that's because of the skyrocketing demand from both rural and urban users. And so part of the solution is that Americans need to make the connection that their usage, whether it's on their phones or their laptops, et cetera, is met by a data center. And there is a latency issue that when you have a data center closer to you, then those speeds are that much better, which Americans demand. They want their devices to work when they want them at all times. They want to be able to watch their show. They aren't able to do their work. And particularly, we're hearing from small businesses, particularly that saying, look, we can't be competitive in a global economy unless we have a data center in our community so that we can continue to have the technology that we need to remain competitive. And so that's part of the conversation, particularly in a representative democracy. It can be messy. Sometimes there can be some ironies there, but that's part of where the tech industry needs to be part of those conversations. Nicole, we only have a couple moments left, but you were just mentioning alternative energy. I mean, there is some talk about nuclear power plants and some talk about putting these data centers in space. How realistic are those? Well, I think they might become a solution, given the fact that we are seeing the recommissioning of nuclear microsites, which I think, you know, are relatively safe from what the science has told us. But I do think that in some time it's actually going to bring up more concern of the community. I mean, at the end of the day, transparency, transparency, transparency. I think there is a need for a better relationship between companies and citizens and people who are really wanting this to work because, as you said, they have good high demand. At the same token, you know, companies have to realize that people are in a really interesting pace right now. Well, it's clear that this is moving very, very quickly, and there's a lot of discussion still to be had. Thank you for this discussion, Nicole Turner-Lee from Brookings, Sahil Khan, Republican strategist who also works at Microsoft. Thank you both very much. And that is all from the team here in Washington. I'm going to hand it back to Richard Gaisford and Al Jazeera's global headquarters in Doha. Well, that's it for this edition of This Is America. We'll be back on Wednesday at 18.30 GMT. It's 2.30 p.m. Eastern time here in the United States. For now, though, from rural Maryland, it's goodbye.