The race for Wisconsin governor has quickly become a prominent battleground over the expansion of data centers, with Republican nominee Tom Tiffany and Democratic rival David Crowley trading sharp accusations. Tiffany has labeled Crowley "Data Center David," accusing the Milwaukee County Executive of supporting the conversion of Wisconsin's farms and parks into global data hubs for corporate interests. Crowley, in turn, has characterized Tiffany as a "corporate shill" who voted for tax cuts benefiting Big Tech and supported policies that ease data center construction.
Despite the heated rhetoric, the substantive policy differences between the two candidates on data centers appear to be narrow, reflecting complex political and economic realities. Both candidates have avoided calling for a statewide moratorium on data center development. They both advocate for local communities to retain veto power over new projects and insist that data centers should bear the full cost of their energy consumption and necessary infrastructure upgrades. Neither candidate supports non-disclosure agreements that shield negotiations with local governments from public scrutiny.
Shifting Political Landscape
Tiffany's aggressive stance on data centers is seen as an attempt to fracture the Democratic coalition, particularly by appealing to voters who express concerns about the environmental and economic impacts of these facilities. Data center policy was a point of contention in the Democratic primary, where Crowley faced a challenger advocating for a moratorium. Crowley's past support for developing Wisconsin into a "data hub," along with Governor Tony Evers' administration's implementation of significant tax subsidies for data center projects, has positioned him as a target.
However, the distinctions between the candidates' actual policies are less pronounced than their attacks suggest. Both have a history of supporting the AI industry, with Crowley expressing a desire for Wisconsin to be an AI leader and Tiffany voting for tax cuts and deregulation for AI companies. Tiffany's alignment with former President Donald Trump, a proponent of data centers, further complicates the narrative.
Policy Overlaps and Divergences
The candidates' policy proposals often mirror existing partisan divides on other issues. Crowley, for instance, proposes that data centers fund renewable energy installations to power their operations and reduce reliance on coal. Tiffany also acknowledges the potential for data centers to fund renewables but expresses concern that solar and wind farms could consume farmland, preferring that data centers support the coal industry.
A significant divergence lies in tax subsidies. Tiffany has pledged to eliminate all taxpayer subsidies for data centers. Crowley, while expressing a need for more rigorous review of existing incentives, has not committed to fully rolling them back, suggesting a more nuanced approach to assessing taxpayer value.
Wisconsin currently offers substantial sales tax exemptions for data center projects, covering construction materials, IT equipment, and electricity indefinitely. These exemptions are projected to cost the state billions in lost revenue, a sensitive issue for voters still wary of large-scale development projects like the Foxconn initiative.
Labor Ties and Local Benefits
Crowley's reluctance to fully disavow data center construction is largely attributed to his ties with Wisconsin's building trades unions, which have collectively contributed significantly to his campaign. These unions strongly support data center development due to the construction jobs and ongoing work they provide. Projects in areas like Port Washington highlight partnerships with unions, demonstrating the economic benefits that municipalities can gain from these developments. For communities struggling with declining manufacturing bases, data centers can significantly increase property values and tax revenues, offering a path to improved public services or reduced property taxes for residents.
This reliance on labor and municipal support explains why neither candidate has embraced a full moratorium on data centers, despite growing public skepticism. While data centers are becoming politically toxic, they remain a lower-tier concern for most Wisconsin voters compared to issues like inflation or the economy. The candidates' focus on data centers, however, signals a shift in political discourse, even as their policies suggest a complex balancing act between competing interests.