By Mike Ludwig
This article was originally published by Truthout
Support for climate action tied to the economy was also visible in the results of state-level ballot initiatives.
The dominant narrative about the Democratic sweep of the midterm elections has focused on President Donald Trump’s brash ineptitude and voters fed up with the costs of living amid reports of corruption emanating from the White House. The climate crisis appeared to take a backseat to concerns about rising energy prices driven by data center build-out and inflation linked to the U.S.-Israel war on Iran, but experts say an emerging class of Democrats successfully fused momentum behind economic populism with the need for climate action to win over voters.
“Voters rewarded economic populists who tied that message to climate, and I think there is a lot of appetite and movement in that direction,” said Patrick Bigger, research director at the Climate and Community Institute (CCI), in an interview with Truthout.
In surveys, potential voters ranked climate change behind most other concerns, with the economy, health care, and the war on Iran consistently topping the list. However, Bigger said victories for Democrats such as Senators-elect Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan and Troy Jackson in Maine suggest that voters are making connections between an economy rigged by elites and environmental concerns such as fossil fuel extraction and noise pollution from data centers.
“We had Troy Jackson in Maine talking about heat pumps and cost of fuel oil, and Abdul El-Sayed talking about reining in Michigan’s utility companies and data centers,” Bigger told Truthout. “How our economy is being organized and its link to the natural world, that is very much front of mind even if people don’t say they’re voting on climate specifically.”
Bigger is the co-author of a new report tracking the success of midterm candidates that embedded messages about climate action within a broader populist economic agenda, reflecting what CCI calls “Green Economic Populism.” The report finds that the 2026 candidates aligned most strongly with Green Economic Populism — virtually all of them Democrats — won 39 out of 56 races for Congress, including six of the seven Senate seats that were up for grabs.
Multiple green populist-aligned candidates also won state and local races or defeated moderates in primary races, most notably Angie Nixon of south Florida, a progressive who won a Democratic congressional primary by tying climate to broken housing insurance markets, according to the report. Nixon narrowly lost to Republican Ashley Moody, and Nixon’s supporters complained that she received little support from the Democratic Party.
According to the CCI report, these candidates offered policy platforms that drew connections between the climate crisis and the rising cost of living by identifying many of the same culprits driving both, including energy utilities, fossil fuel companies, corporate landlords, AI companies, and data center developers. Candidates such Democrat Claire Valdez, the first Native American woman to win a U.S. House seat from New York, and Sen.-elect Peggy Flanagan in Minnesota, argued that one way to lower costs is to “take back power from the elite” and invest in cheap clean power and green infrastructure built by union labor.
”Our polling shows that people link these costs of living crisis to the climate crisis,” Bigger said.
Other incoming House members who ran on a green economic populist platform include Democrats Angela Gonzales-Torres of California, Melat Kiros of Colorado, Patty Garcia of Illinois, Will Lawrence of Michigan, and Chris Rabb of Pennsylvania, according to the report. Incumbent green populist Democrats returning to Congress after fending off GOP challengers include Rep. Ro Khanna of California, Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, and Rep. Adelita Grijalva of Arizona, among others.
Climate and energy policy remains a challenge for Democrats. On November 9, the Senate voted 73-25 to advance a permitting “reform” bill that split the Democratic caucus, with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) arguing Democrats should negotiate a new deal once they take the majority.
“I cannot support a bill that relies on a handshake promise from the same administration that’s spent the last two years waging a war on new clean energy projects to hold up its end of the bargain, and continues to do so even after negotiating the reform proposal,” Wyden said in a statement.
The bill would speed up permitting for transmission lines needed for clean energy infrastructure but also defang bedrock environmental laws that communities rely on to challenge polluters and fossil fuel projects.
While CCI does not comment on pending legislation, Bigger suggested policy makers could speed up permitting for clean energy projects by properly funding the federal agencies responsible, which have suffered from deep staffing and budget cuts under Trump.
“If you are wanting to get more renewables on the grid, get more transmission on the grid, accelerate the clean energy build-out in any shape or form — you have to staff the requisite agencies to do that permitting,” Bigger said. “Gutting the Endangered Species Act instead of rebuilding staff at the Bureau of Land Management seems like a stupid way to do it.”
Support for green economic populism — and frustration with industrial and Silicon Valley elites — was also visible in the results of state-level ballot initiatives. Of the 56 ballot measures related to climate and energy tracked by CCI, including proposals for prohibiting electric utilities from using profits to influence politicians, 21 initiatives restricting the industry passed while 10 pro-industry initiatives failed.
The backlash to the AI industry and data center build-out is profound: According to Bigger, 45 out of 46 local data center measures in the midterms went against developers, and 30 of 31 ballot measures that seek to impose restrictions passed while all 15 pro-development measures failed.
Green economic populism has been brewing at the nexus of the climate action and labor movements for the past two decades, with environmental justice activists and union members finding common cause in a “just transition” away from reliance on climate-warming oil and gas. This coalition shaped federal policy under the Biden administration, which pushed to expand clean energy infrastructure and pledged to address environmental racism.
However, much of the limited progress made under President Joe Biden was quickly reversed by Trump and the current GOP majority in Congress. Frustrated with Trump and Republicans, voters handed Democrats a solid majority for 2027.
Founded in 2006 by the Sierra Club and United Steelworkers, the BlueGreen Alliance promotes job-creating policies that fuse worker power with environmental justice. As midterm election results revealed a “blue tsunami” last week, BlueGreen Alliance Executive Director Jason Walsh said that creating opportunity for workers while addressing environmental challenges is not just good policy, it’s good politics.
“Across our coalition, we’re seeing those concerns come together around good-paying union jobs, affordable energy, and healthier communities,” said Walsh in an email. “In this election, union households demonstrated strong support for Democrats who won majorities in the House and Senate.”
The permitting bill that divided Democrats and advanced in the Senate this week reveals a level of tension within that coalition. The legislation is supported by some building trade unions seeking to create jobs for members, but environmental groups oppose the bill, arguing it contains handouts for polluters and the data center developers rebuked by midterm voters.
“This bad bill would only encourage and permit greater buildout of data centers and the polluting fracked gas power plants and pipelines required to serve these enormous facilities,” said Jim Walsh, policy director at the environmental group Food & Water Watch, in a statement.
Beyond Congress, Bigger is encouraged by Democrats winning state and local elections, including races for governor in Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania — three states where fracking has exploded over the past two decades, providing the oil and gas industry with serious political leverage. The midterm results are a signal that the industry’s political and economic dominance in these states may be fading as the ruling class faces a backlash from voters.
“There is cool stuff happening not just at the federal level, but across the country,” Bigger said.
This article was originally published by Truthout and is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Please maintain all links and credits in accordance with our republishing guidelines.
Editor’s Note: At a moment when the once vaunted model of responsible journalism is overwhelmingly the play thing of self-serving billionaires and their corporate scribes, alternatives of integrity are desperately needed, and ScheerPost is one of them. Please support our independent journalism by contributing to our online donation platform, Network for Good, or send a check to our new PO Box. We can’t thank you enough, and promise to keep bringing you this kind of vital news.
You can also make a donation to our PayPal or subscribe to our Patreon.