The midterm elections are scheduled for Nov. 3, with early voting already off the ground in some states. In campaigns across the country, politicians are talking about the biggest controversies in tech, from privacy and cybersecurity to child online safety. These hot-button issues are exposing major gaps in US legislation and foundational vulnerabilities that now fuel intense debate over emerging technologies like AI.
Big Tech executives are also ramping up political contributions ahead of the elections, exerting major financial influence over electoral races. Elon Musk is one of the biggest donors, funneling around $366 million into conservative causes and right-wing candidates, according to The Guardian. The venture capitalist firm Andreessen Horowitz has spent $91.3 million this year on Republican-aligned groups. OpenAI President Greg Brockman and his wife, Anna, made a $25 million personal donation to a pro-AI PAC called Leading the Future. (The Brockmans were also among the largest individual donors to a MAGA super PAC in 2024.)
Here’s what you need to know about three of the biggest tech policy debates that may show up on your ballot or affect your vote this November. Make sure to review your state’s board of elections website or other sources like Vote.org to check your registration, find your polling place and see a sample ballot. You can also read CNET’s tips for spotting political deepfakes and scams.
More from CNET
Data center construction
Data centers have found a rare point of agreement across the political spectrum: 70% of US adults — spanning Republicans, Democrats and independents — are opposed to local data center construction, according to a July Gallup poll.
Residents have good reason to be wary of these massive server farms. To keep generative AI programs running, data centers eat up enormous amounts of electricity and water. Some neighborhoods have seen rising electricity costs passed onto them or had their water contaminated during construction.
Pro-data center advocates claim these facilities create jobs and long-term investment, but critics warn that there aren’t many long-term positions available once construction is complete.
Facing significant public backlash, states have already begun legislating. In July, New York enacted a temporary pause on hyperscale data center construction, and many other state legislatures are considering similar bills. Back in April, a similar measure was proposed in Maine, but outgoing Democratic Gov. Janet Mills vetoed the bill. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Hannah Pingree has said Mills was wrong to veto the “incredibly urgent” moratorium.
President Donald Trump has been a staunch supporter of data centers, claiming that data center opposition is “Chinese PR” and that communities that don’t allow data centers will end up “backwards and poor.” There’s no proof either claim is true.
Despite Trump’s political and financial allegiance to Big Tech’s data center projects, politicians in both red and blue states are feeling pressure from their respective constituencies. A leaked GOP strategy memo called data centers “a sleeper issue for the entire election cycle,” one that can dramatically sway public opinion and alter results.
Nowhere is this issue more relevant than in Virginia, home to more data centers than any other state, where both Senate candidates have spoken about needing to rein them in. During a Q&A with local news, incumbent Democrat Mark Warner said that data centers shouldn’t be allowed to pass on their electric costs to residents, and Republican Bert Mizusawa said that he would support communities being able to block data centers from moving in.
It’s a leading issue in Texas, too. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott announced a “pause” on data center construction, but recent reports show it failed to slow down development. Meanwhile, The Texas Tribune revealed that Abbott took $5 million in donations from data center owners. His Democratic challenger, Gina Hinojosa, has called for a genuine freeze on new data center facilities.
Flock surveillance cameras
AI-enabled cameras and automated license plate readers made by companies like Flock have sparked intense debate over surveillance and privacy, reaching a fever pitch in local and state governments this year.
Flock Safety says its tech helps law enforcement do its job and reduce crime. Over 6,000 communities across the US have Flock cameras, according to a July estimate from the company.
Lawyers and digital rights advocates like the Electronic Frontier Foundation have highlighted how Flock violates the Fourth Amendment and how its capabilities are easily abused. Law enforcement officers have allegedly used Flock cameras to stalk ex-girlfriends, track people seeking abortions, aid ICE activity and carry out warrantless searches. In one memorable instance that quickly went viral online, a costumed Darth Vader praised Flock at a San Diego city council meeting, saying: “The emperor is a fan of Flock.”
Opposition to Flock is another national issue that crosses party lines, based on shared concerns around government overreach and civil liberties. In Texas, Democratic Senate hopeful James Talarico said, “Flock cameras have no place in Texas,” and Abbott paused the state’s funding for Flock. More than 200 cities have canceled or chosen not to renew their Flock contracts, the BBC reported in September. Some districts also have ballot measures about the tech, like one in York, Maine, that lets voters decide whether to ban automated license plate readers.
AI regulation
Unsurprisingly, artificial intelligence has taken center stage among this election season’s tech concerns. And for good reason: The controversial tech is far more pervasive now than it was in 2024, and fears about AI have grown in tandem with its capabilities.
Nearly half of US adults under 30 say AI will have a negative impact on society, and across age groups, more than 60% say AI is advancing too quickly, the Pew Research Center found in July. There are widespread public concerns over job loss, the spread of misinformation, the proliferation of deepfakes and economic volatility.
One of the biggest AI policy debates is over the role of the federal government in regulating the tech, with many of the major labs arguing that they are capable of “self policing.” The Trump administration has been vocal about avoiding AI regulatory policies and touting frameworks that give more power to AI companies than regulators, including during the G20 this fall.
While AI itself won’t be directly on the ballot like local initiatives around data centers and Flock cameras, it’s become a critical flashpoint for voters. The tension was vividly illustrated during the summer elections, most notably in New York’s congressional primary.
Democratic State Assemblymember Alex Bores, who authored some of the country’s strictest state-level AI safety laws, found his congressional bid transformed into a multimillion-dollar proxy war. He garnered national attention with his call to regulate Big Tech more forcefully, which then resulted in more than $8 million poured into attack ads and his opponent’s campaign. Bores ultimately lost, but the race signaled a major tech battlefield, where advocacy of AI guardrails goes against the deep pockets and lobbying influence of Silicon Valley.