When Wisconsin voters finished counting the Democratic primary for governor in the early hours of September 10, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley emerged victorious over state Rep. Francesca Hong by fewer than 4,000 votes. While the race was framed as a clash between the party establishment and its left flank, the decisive issue for many voters was the future of data centers in the state.
Crowley’s Pro‑Data Center Platform
Crowley campaigned on a straightforward promise: allow data centers to be built, but require them to deliver real benefits to the surrounding communities. He echoed President Trump’s Ratepayer Protection Pledge, insisting that data‑center operators should cover the full cost of any grid upgrades they need, use union labor and sign community‑benefit agreements.
These commitments align with the concerns of key constituencies—union members, blue‑collar workers and voters who prioritize job creation. In a recent survey by the Joseph Rainey Center of 1,010 registered voters, 66% supported requiring data‑center operators to sign community‑benefit agreements, and 61% wanted rate‑payer protections that force companies to cover their own power costs.
Voter Sentiment on Data Centers
The same poll showed that overall sentiment toward data centers was mixed, with 29% of respondents expressing a favorable view and 48% unfavorable. However, the data reveal important nuances. Black voters were the most supportive demographic, with 36% favorable to 30% unfavorable, and a notable 19% citing job loss as their top concern. White voters were less enthusiastic, registering 29% favorable and 53% unfavorable.
Unions, traditionally allied with Democratic candidates, stood firmly on the side of data‑center development, recognizing that these facilities provide well‑paying, non‑college‑degree jobs that are difficult to outsource. Rural communities also see data centers as a catalyst for economic development, with Loudon County—home to more than 250 data centers—projected to collect $1.3 billion in tax revenue next year, enabling a 30% reduction in property taxes over the past decade.
Why the Moratorium Fell Short
Hong’s signature policy—a moratorium on new AI data‑center construction—failed to gain traction beyond the most liberal voters, 41% of whom held a very unfavorable view of data centers. While her stance energized a segment of the electorate, the broader voting public appeared more interested in concrete economic benefits than abstract opposition.
By contrast, Crowley’s approach offered a clear, accountable framework: data‑center projects would be tied to local hiring, infrastructure upgrades and measurable community contributions before construction began. This pragmatic solution resonated with voters who want jobs and accountability without sacrificing technological progress.
Implications for Future Policy
The primary results suggest that Wisconsin’s Democratic electorate is open to data‑center development when it is paired with strong safeguards for workers and communities. As the state moves toward the general election, candidates on both sides of the aisle will likely need to adopt similar accountability measures to win voter confidence.
For local leaders, the takeaway is clear: embracing data‑center projects does not have to mean compromising on job security or community welfare. By mandating community‑benefit agreements and rate‑payer protections, policymakers can ensure that the technology sector contributes to Wisconsin’s economic vitality while upholding the values of hard‑working families.
Original reporting: Wisconsin Watch — read the source article.
