Data Centers Become a Defining Issue for Native American Candidates

The development of data centers has emerged as a significant and often contentious issue for Native American tribes and candidates, forcing many to articulate clear positions on the burgeoning technology sector.

This debate is playing out across various campaigns. In New Mexico, Deb Haaland is running for governor, while Sharice Davids is seeking a House seat from Kansas, Mary Peltola is running for the U.S. Senate in Alaska, and Peggy Flanagan is in a Minnesota U.S. Senate race. All are confronting the data center question directly.

Flanagan, who won the Democratic-Farmer-Labor primary for the U.S. Senate in Minnesota, has been vocal about artificial intelligence, labeling it an "existential threat to us if it gets out of control." This stance aligns with her broader campaign strategy, which has included criticism of corporate influence, notably targeting ads against her opponent's ties to the crypto industry. Analysts view the focus on AI and data centers as a continuation of this anti-corporate money narrative.

Davids, a former MMA fighter and lawyer, has adopted a more pragmatic approach. In a Kansas voter guide, she stated that "no data center should move forward if it raises electricity costs for families, wastes our limited water resources, or shifts the burden onto Kansas communities." She also noted that data center decisions are largely made at the state and local levels, a position that aligns with her committee assignments. Davids has also engaged with the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, which has expressed concerns about proposed changes that could weaken tribal consultation rights.

Haaland's campaign has proposed renewable energy solutions, such as solar, wind, and geothermal power, to offset data center energy consumption and suggested that high-demand industries should build their own energy infrastructure. However, on Project Jupiter, a major data center project in New Mexico, her public statements have been more reserved. Pressed by a voter, she indicated she did not have the authority to halt the project. More recently, her campaign stated support for a moratorium on new data center development until "strong, reliable guardrails" are in place. This shift followed reports of significant campaign donations from executives at companies involved in Project Jupiter. Santa Fe and Socorro Counties in New Mexico have already implemented data center moratoriums, and state legislators have proposed similar measures.

A petition circulating in New Mexico calls on Haaland to return the donations and commit to no AI data centers without exceptions. Her campaign responded that while she hasn't discussed returning the money, she "cannot be bowled over" by campaign donations. Project Jupiter is reportedly 26% complete, despite having two permits paused by the New Mexico Supreme Court.

Peltola in Alaska takes a different approach, deferring to local sentiment regarding data centers, provided they do not strain the existing power grid. This contrasts with her opponent's support for bringing data centers to Alaska's military installations and a significant data center proposal in the North Slope. However, the notion of "local support" in Alaska is complex, as a substantial portion of the state's land is controlled by Alaska Native corporations, whose fiduciary duties to shareholders may not always align with broader community consensus.

These debates are occurring alongside proposed changes to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires federal agencies to assess the impact of development on historic sites. If enacted, these changes could potentially allow data center developers to utilize federal land without standard review processes, weakening tribal consultation rights.

More than 700 organizations, including Native Nations, have opposed these changes to Section 106. Similar efforts to streamline reviews for energy and land-management projects were seen during the Trump administration with Secretarial Order 3389, which the Biden administration later reversed. The current push to revise Section 106 is viewed as a continuation of a long-standing effort by energy and infrastructure companies to reduce delays for their projects, with data center developers being the latest to join this push.

While Native candidates may differ on specific approaches to data center development, a common thread is the imperative to protect Native Nations' voices in land use decisions as powerful industries increasingly seek to develop on tribal territories.