 
|
Signature Sponsor
October 19, 2026 - Less than three weeks before the midterms, Americans are paying some of the highest gas, diesel, and electricity prices they have seen, and energy has become a defining issue on the ballot. Energy is on the ballot this November: the candidates voters choose will decide what comes next and what it will cost. As energy demand continues to grow, much thanks to data center development, most of the country just endured one of the hottest summers on record, along with severe drought and wildfires, and forecasters warn that the strongest El Niño ever observed could bring more weather disasters this winter.
Federal Energy Policy Shifts
Over the last two years, Republicans have reshaped federal energy policy by prioritizing fossil fuel development and resisting clean energy development. Republicans have rescinded almost all clean energy incentives passed in the Inflation Reduction Act and significantly reduced federal funding for clean energy research and development, national labs, and commercialization programs.
The war in Iran has pushed oil prices up around the world, and drivers are paying record-high fuel prices. The AI boom has accelerated data center development just as fossil fuel emissions-driven climate change has caused record temperatures and extreme weather put additional strain on the grid, and many consumers are paying higher electricity costs as a result. Fuel efficiency standards and energy efficiency rules, which have saved consumers money on vehicles and appliances over the years, have been reversed.
With federal energy policy top of mind for voters this November, statewide elections still have the potential to significantly shape energy policy and prices, and will determine the future of the grid. With 36 governors’ races, 35 Senate races, and the House up for grabs, state-level energy policy could be the deciding factor in what energy prices are and who pays.
Data Center Development and Electricity Prices
Data centers are arguably the most debated energy issue of the 2026 midterms. A Gallup poll from March shows that 71% of Americans oppose data centers in their communities. According to Cook Political Report, nearly 50 political broadcast ads feature data centers. Voters fear they will be stuck with the bill for surging electricity costs driven by data center demand. States decide what can be built and how much can be charged for electricity through public utility commissions and state energy offices.
Almost every candidate favors ratepayer protections for development of data centers, but they vary on how this will be enforced. Democrats generally favor moratoriums or pauses on data center development more than Republicans do. They are using these restrictions to require that data center developers bring their own energy and pay for it so that none of the cost is passed to ratepayers. For example, Amy Acton (OH) is in favor of a conditional moratorium or pause that would be lifted once rules and guardrails are passed to protect ratepayers and ensure community members are in favor. Other Democratic candidates like Crowley (WI) would attach clean energy and labor requirements to subsidies, and Shapiro (PA) has banned non-disclosure agreements.
Republican candidates are more in favor of prioritizing US development of AI technology to get ahead of other countries. However, many favor repealing data center subsidies and promise relief from property tax on new projects. Some Republicans, such as Tom Tiffany (WI), also favor keeping coal plants open to meet the additional electricity demand of new data centers.
Energy Development Is Partisan
According to a report by Rhodium Group, electricity prices have increased in every state except Nevada and Hawaii since 2024. Republican candidates have blamed clean energy development, mandates, and coal retirements for rising electricity prices. In reality, ratepayers have seen their electricity prices skyrocket in the last five years despite clean energy development. The same report explains that low energy prices from 2011-2020 were largely because of the shift from coal to natural gas, the development of wind and solar energy, and energy efficiency technologies.
The Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have rolled back the clean energy incentives passed in 2021 and 2022, and the result has been slower growth in new US-based clean energy manufacturing facilities, like batteries, EVs, solar cells, and hydrogen. The administration has also tried to mandate that retiring coal plants stay online, despite the unfavorable economics. Democrats criticize this move as “putting a finger on the scale” for energy technologies, limiting consumer choice, and contributing to climate change.
The Power of Governors and Congress to Influence Power
Governors have broad power to shape energy policy, with or without support from the federal government. They have levers to reduce energy costs and emissions through energy commissions, public utility commission appointments, authority over permitting and siting oil and gas exploration and new projects and grid modernization, and setting emissions goals. There are, of course, limits; policies can be challenged in courts, and divided state legislatures can make these efforts harder to pass.
Congress can act as a check on the Trump administration, especially if Democrats take the House or Senate (or both). Congress controls the federal budget, and its approval is needed to pass legislation. A change in the makeup of Congress is likely to make it more difficult for the Trump administration to continue to roll back regulations, cut funding for clean energy projects, and limit or expand the war in Iran.
Energy Election Cheat Sheet
Races that will be decided by the midterms will decide how much electricity costs, who pays for it, and whether climate laws will survive. So where do the candidates stand on these issues? Policies that win in these elections could become templates for other states and shape where AI investment lands.
When it comes to data centers, every competitive governor race has seen data centers become an important issue to voters. Candidates in both parties promise ratepayer protection from surging electricity prices. The split is whether to pause new projects first or set conditions while growth continues.
Ohio
Governor: Acton (D) vs. Ramaswamy (R) (toss up)
Both candidates favor pausing new data center projects. Vivek Ramaswamy is a billionaire with investments in data center tech, which some see as a conflict of interest in how he would appoint energy and tech regulators. However, he has stated that he believes that tech companies should have to pay for the electricity they use themselves. On the other hand, Dr. Amy Acton favors a pause on all new data center development, with conditions to meet before resuming development.
Senate: Brown (D) vs. Husted (R) (toss-up):
John Husted, the incumbent who was appointed to JD Vance’s seat, voted to end Biden-era clean energy tax credits in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and backs repealing EPA greenhouse gas standards for coal plants. Sherrod Brown, who lost his seat to Moreno in 2024, supported the IRA but called EPA’s coal rules unrealistic.
Nevada
Governor Ford (D) vs. Lombardo (R) (toss up)
The candidates in this race have opposing approaches to data centers. Current governor, Joe Lombardo, has been in favor of data center development and encouraged their presence in Nevada. However, he signed an executive order to trimbens tax breaks to developers. Current Attorney General, Aaron Ford, has pledged to pause those tax breaks if he is elected. Ford has also drafted a bill to expand the public utilities commission to require data center developers to pay for their own electricity.
Iowa
Governor: Sand (D) vs Lahn (R) (toss up)
Both candidates agree on eliminating tax break subsidies for data centers but differ on regulations. Zach Lahn is calling for a moratorium until laws are settled and states that developers must pay for the electricity and infrastructure that they use. Rob Sand has proposed banning NDAs between public officials and developers and transparency on economic impacts. He has also proposed legislation that requires data centers to pay for the energy and infrastructure they use
Senate: Hinson (R) vs. Turek (D) (toss-up)
In the corn capital, Iowa, energy shows up as farm and fuel costs. In a debate, both candidates said data centers shouldn’t get tax breaks and that Congress should do more about record diesel costs. They are split on the war with Iran, with Turek opposing and Hinson supporting.
Kansas
Governor: Holscher (D) vs. Masterson (R) (Lean R)
Both candidates in this race voted for a bill in 2025 that granted a 20-year tax exemption to data center developers in Kansas. Cindy Holscher has since said she reconsidered her vote and would freeze development of data centers until more environmental and financial boundaries are established if elected governor. Ty Masterson has defended his vote and stated that the law established in the bill protects communities because local authorities have the ability to allow development
Texas
Governor: Hinojosa (D) vs. Abbott (R) (Lean R)
Gina Hinojosa is calling for a pause on all data center development until protections for consumers are passed in Texas. She also said there must be more transparency into the tax breaks that have been passed for data centers. Greg Abbott, the current governor, has received campaign money from tech companies that are building in Texas, and celebrated the growth of the industry in Texas. However, he has recently pulled back in his enthusiasm, now pausing permits for development and stating he wants power audits and for developers to pay for their own infrastructure costs.
Senate: Paxton (R) vs. Talarico (D) (toss-up)
Ken Paxton, the current attorney General of Texas, has sued asset managers to protect coal, and has urged leaving the Paris Agreement. Talarico calls climate a top priority and favors geothermal and hydrogen jobs, while also saying Texas should keep its energy dominance, which lies in solar and wind.
Alaska
Senate: Sullivan (R) vs. Peltola (D) (toss-up)
Dan Sullivan has made the Alaska natural gas pipeline a centerpiece of his campaign. Mary Peltola backs the pipeline and more in-state refining, but also wants to restore federal renewable energy tax credits.
Wisconsin
Governor: Crowley (D) vs. Tiffany (R) (toss up)
Neither candidate backs a moratorium. Both candidates want to ban non-disclosure agreements between developers and local governments. David Crowley has shown support for bringing AI and tech companies to Wisconsin, and has said he wants to scale back the subsidies they’ve been given, but not eliminate them. Tom Tiffany is in favor of eliminating the subsidies. While Crowley has stated that developers should have a 100% clean energy mandate, Tiffany has shown opposition to that stance.
Pennsylvania
Governor: Shapiro (D) vs. Garrity (R) (Likely D)
Josh Shapiro has said he would end tax exemptions for developers and stop prioritizing their permit applications. He has issued an executive order requiring developers to meet certain commitments before the state will approve their permits. Stacy Garrity has called for a pause on data center development altogether to allow for an update in zoning laws.
Georgia
Governor: Bottoms (D) vs. Jackson (R) (toss up)
Georgia has become the national leader in data center construction which has sparked a debate about the best way to manage the development. Keisha Lance Bottoms is in favor of a statewide pause on development to determine the strain they are putting on communities, the grid, and the environment. Rick Jackson, who is a billionaire who is invested in data center development in Texas, has stated that local authorities should decide if data centers are built, and proposing that shifting taxes to eliminate residential property taxes.
Michigan
Governor: Benson (D) vs James (R) (Lean D)
John James has stated that any incentives for data centers should be tied to measurable benefits for communities, stopping short of saying they should be eliminated. James has also been criticized for taking money from data center developers. Jocelyn Benson takes a similar position on incentives, has called for public hearings for community members to share concerns, but does not support an outright ban. She has also faced criticism because her husband has worked for a data center partner.
Michigan’s 100% clean energy target by 2040 law is also at stake. John James said he would make a priority to repeal the law. Benson supports keeping the law in place.
Senate: Rogers (R) vs. El-Sayed (D) (Lean D)
In Michigan, the auto industry is the main energy issue which encompasses EVs. Rogers calls EV mandates (which are incentives, not mandates) damaging to Michigan’s auto industry, while El-Sayed wants a pathway to 100% renewable energy.
Arizona
Governor: Hobbs (D) vs Biggs (R) (Lean D)
Katie Hobbs, the incumbent governor, has successfully implemented a pause on data center tax incentives but opposes a data center development pause, arguing that they are important to the state’s growth. Biggs is calling for a permanent end to state subsidies, but opposes regulations on water, electricity, and zoning to avoid data centers from pulling electricity and water that will raise the price of utilities in communities near new data centers.
Connecticut
Governor: Fazio (R) vs Lamont (D)
In Connecticut, republican candidate Fazio would exit the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or RGGI (pronounced Reggie), and an exit would weaken the Northeast carbon market for every other member - Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia. The incumbent governor, Lamont, supports RGGI.
California
Governor: Hilton (R) vs Becerra (D) (Safe D)
In California, Xavier Becerra is the Democrat running to keep the cap and trade and low carbon fuel standards in place despite federal pushback, and republican candidate Steve Hilton wants to expand fossil fuel development. This race is not considered competitive and will likely go to Becerra.
Colorado
Amendment 82
While the governor’s race in Colorado is not expected to be competitive (Democrat Phil Weiser has a substantial lead over Victor Marx), there is a ballot initiative that is a statewide measure that would result in expanded natural gas demand. Amendment 82 gives the constitutional right to buy and sell natural gas, effectively making it illegal for building standards to ban natural gas lines or appliances. This would be grounds for a challenge to Colorado’s climate policies that have been passed into law. The measure was funded by Advance Colorado, a conservative advocacy group, and is widely opposed by environmental groups.
November 3rd’s midterm will answer a question the federal government has inadvertently put on the ballot: who pays for the energy behind America’s next phase of growth. Data centers, extreme heat, and volatile fuel prices are already showing up on household bills, and the rate cases, siting decisions, and clean energy laws that determine where those costs fall are decided at the state level. Candidates in both parties promise that ratepayers won’t foot the bill, but propose different policies to meet that promise. Voters should look past the promise to answer the questions: who will sit on utility commissions, what developers will be required to bring to the table, and whether state climate laws and carbon markets survive.
|
|