The Bandwidth: Decoding Health + AI

1) The people have spoken, locally

Last week I argued that the data center backlash is mostly a failure of community governance. Things like setback rules, noise limits, environmental review, and making builders pay for their own power are local tools. On Tuesday, voters reached for one of the most direct tools of local governance: ballot initiatives. Forty-one data center measures were on ballots across 10 states, 21 of them in Ohio alone. Ballotpedia counted 28 that would limit development and 13 that would clear the way for it. Voters took the restrictive side on all but one: they passed the bans and moratoriums, and they voted down the zoning changes and approvals.

The advocates behind the restrictive ballot measures read this as a seismic change. Axios quotes Brad Carson of Americans for Responsible Innovation calling it an “AI earthquake,” and reports that AI executives are already working on “a more palatable version” of the buildout. My read is narrower. The measures that passed restrict or block specific projects. The moratorium proposed by Texas Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa, for instance, is conditioned on the legislature acting on water, electricity, air, and property rights by mid-2027. That is a list of terms and conditions that need to be met, not a permanent blockade.

For its part, industry appears to be getting the message. Even before the election results started to come in, Nvidia’s Jensen Huang said to Fortune’s Eye on AI newsletter: “before we bring in massive amounts of investment into a small community, I think we have to go first and let the community know what we’re planning to do. Partner with the community, invest in the community, and if the community really doesn’t want us to be there, find another community.” He thinks the industry has already changed its approach.