The midterms delivered a political earthquake, and the aftershocks will be felt across state capitals. Democrats flipped governor’s mansions in states they hadn’t won in decades, broke Republican supermajorities across the Midwest, and won several trifectas. But for clean energy siting policy, the picture is far more mixed.
Neither a Democratic nor Republican win automatically equals a win for better siting outcomes. In many states, the results produced divided governments, where meaningful reform will require the governor and legislature to find common ground.
Siting reform doesn’t always break along party lines, either. Candidates on both sides have voiced support for building more energy projects and acknowledge that fixing permitting processes will take political willpower. Meanwhile, some of the most consequential results for siting policy came further down the ballot, as voters in some states reshaped the utility commissions that approve new generation and set the terms for grid investment.
While most eyes were on Congress, we focused on 11 states with potential for siting reform in 2027: Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin. Each type of outcome changes the game differently.
Advocates can go on offense in states where Democrats won new trifectas, as in Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Compromise is critical in states where a Democratic governor now faces a Republican-led legislature and the veto becomes a backstop against restrictive bills. And in states where Republicans kept control but lost their supermajorities, as in Indiana and Missouri, Democrats have gained leverage to block or shape legislation, even without the support of the governor’s office.
What races did we watch?
Governor Races
For siting and permitting legislation, governors can set policy agendas for their party, shepherd priorities through the legislature, or play a more defensive role by vetoing legislation. In some states, governors can also appoint members to the utility commission, which may have authority over energy siting and permitting.
Legislative Races
State legislatures are where new siting and permitting bills are introduced, debated, amended, and passed. During the midterms, we were monitoring:
- Whether a chamber flipped party control, creating a divided government or a new trifecta. Trifectas make legislating much simpler, while divided control often means fewer bills pass, especially on siting.
- Whether a supermajority was lost or gained. A legislature with a veto-proof supermajority in both chambers can override the governor’s veto. The threshold varies by state: most states mark a supermajority as 2/3 of the legislature, while others (like Ohio) mark it as 3/5.
Which states have new Democratic trifectas?
Pennsylvania
In Pennsylvania, incumbent Governor Josh Shapiro (D) cruised to victory, the Pennsylvania House remained under Democratic control, and the Senate also flipped to blue (though with a narrow, one seat margin). This trifecta delivers Gov. Shapiro a broad mandate to pass his agenda through a legislature that, until now, has stymied his more ambitious policy initiatives.
On siting, it may open the door for significant permissive reforms. That depends upon whether Democrats effectively wield their new-found trifecta power – which they haven’t held since 1993 – with no room for error.
Wisconsin
The election in Wisconsin tells a similar story. In an open governor’s race to fill the seat vacated by Tony Evers (D), David Crowley (D) faced off against Tom Tiffany (R). Crowley prevailed. Democrats also flipped both legislative chambers, which were previously under Republican control, giving the party full control of state government for the first time since 2010.
That could open the door to more permissive siting and permitting policy in a state that has recently seen significant attempts at restricting its permissive siting laws.
The governor’s office matters here in its own right. Outgoing Gov. Evers vetoed a record number of bills during his tenure and made extensive use of Wisconsin’s partial veto power. The veto pen won’t be needed in 2027, but the governor also appoints the commissioners of the Public Service Commission. Tiffany, who campaigned against wind and solar development on farmland and blamed the PSC for rising utility rates, could have used those appointments to undercut much of the PSC’s siting and permitting work.
Arizona
In Arizona, incumbent Gov. Katie Hobbs (D) defeated Andy Biggs (R). Democrats also flipped both the House and Senate, giving the party a trifecta that changes the game for siting policy in the state.
Arizona consistently ranks among the top states for restrictive siting bills introduced in the legislature, and Gov. Hobbs spent her first term as a reliable veto backstop against them. With Democrats now in control of the legislature, advocates can shift from defense to offense, pursuing permissive siting and permitting reforms rather than just blocking harmful ones.
Arizonans also directly elect their Corporation Commission, which regulates utilities and was held entirely by Republicans before Tuesday’s election. Democrats Clara Pratte and Jonathon Hill prevailed, breaking the Republican monopoly on the commission – though Republicans keep the majority.
Which states now have Democratic governors but Republican legislatures?
Texas
For the first time in more than three decades, Texas has elected a Democratic governor: Gina Hinojosa (D) defeated incumbent Gov. Greg Abbott (R). Perhaps even more shockingly, Democrats flipped more than 20 seats to win the Texas House, plus the Lieutenant Governorship.
That shifts power away from the Texas Senate, which has repeatedly advanced bills to constrain the state’s nation-leading renewable energy deployment. This almost certainly protects the renewable energy industry in Texas and may even open the door for permissive siting legislation, though any such bill would still need to clear a Republican-controlled Senate.
Iowa
The victory of Rob Sand (D) as governor of Iowa is less critical from the veto backstop perspective. The Republican-controlled Iowa legislature advanced permissive reforms last year and is generally open to improving siting and permitting.
Interestingly, Governor-Elect Sand has stated that he supports maintaining the ability for local governments to reject renewable projects. This raises questions about his support for the Iowa Utilities Commission, whose commissioners are appointed by the governor and has recently exercised its authority to override arbitrary local permitting decisions.
Additionally, it’s unclear how open the Republican-controlled Iowa legislature will be to working with Governor-Elect Sand to further improve renewable energy siting and permitting outcomes in the state. They may be less willing to give him a win.
Ohio
In Ohio, we should assume the legislature will do everything possible to obstruct the incoming governor. The bitter fight between Amy Acton (D) and Vivek Ramaswamy (R), which spilled over into national news, ended with Acton winning the open seat by seven points.
Advocates should expect a difficult road ahead for policymaking in Ohio, where legislators will likely be trying their hardest to ensure Acton is a one-term governor. This may make permissive siting reform in the state even more difficult.
The Ohio House also lost its Republican supermajority. Because a veto override requires a 3/5 vote in both chambers, Republicans cannot override Acton’s vetoes without Democratic support – making her a meaningful backstop against restrictive legislation.
Acton will also appoint the commissioners of the Public Utilities Commission and the cabinet directors who hold most of the voting seats on the Ohio Power Siting Board.
Georgia
Georgia was a true toss-up going into Election Day as Keisha Lance Bottoms (D) and Rick Jackson (R) vied for Gov. Kemp’s open seat. Lance Bottoms secured the win, and Democrats also won control of the Georgia House, though Republicans kept the Senate.
With power now split between the parties, any siting and permitting reform will require bipartisan cooperation, and there may be real room for it. Gov. Kemp promoted Georgia as open for business for both new large load and new generation, while Governor-Elect Lance Bottoms has called for a moratorium on data center development. That makes large load a likely point of negotiation, while her posture toward renewable energy development remains unclear.
The bigger opportunity may be at the Public Service Commission, which Georgians elect directly. Democrat Peter Hubbard won re-election and Democrat Shelia Edwards won an open seat, giving Democrats their first majority on the commission since 2002. Both have voiced strong support for solar, which could open new avenues for clean energy procurement and grid planning in the state.
Kansas
Kansas saw a surprisingly close election to replace term-limited Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly. With Cindy Holscher (D) likely prevailing over Ty Masterson (R), the governor’s office stays in Democratic hands, giving advocates a veto backstop against the restrictive siting proposals that have surfaced in the Republican-controlled legislature. That backstop is now even stronger: Republicans fell short of the 84 seats needed for a 2/3 supermajority in the Kansas House, so they cannot override Governor-Elect Holscher’s vetoes on party-line votes.
In what states did Republican control hold or extend?
Oklahoma
Cyndi Munson’s (D) long-shot bid for governor of Oklahoma turned out to be just that. Oklahomans elected Mike Mazzei (R) to replace term-limited Gov. Kevin Stitt (R).
While Governor-Elect Mazzei has expressed skepticism about tax credits for wind and solar, he has also signaled an openness to new generation as demand from large loads continues to grow.
There are also early signs that the Oklahoma legislature may be moving past its long-running fights over wind as a new crop of more moderate policymakers won election. Together, these dynamics could create space for more productive conversations on siting and permitting in the years ahead.
Which states saw legislative shifts?
Missouri
Democrats broke Republican supermajorities in both the Missouri House and Senate, ending 14 years of 2/3 GOP control. In the House, Democrats flipped 16 seats, leaving a 95–68 Republican majority when the chamber convenes in January.
Republicans keep the governorship and both chambers – and because Gov. Mike Kehoe (R) was not on the ballot, the change will have little bearing on vetoes. It could still give Democrats more leverage as the legislature takes on load growth issues next session.
Indiana
In Indiana, Democrats broke through with statewide wins for auditor and secretary of state. While they flipped several seats in both chambers, breaking the Republican supermajorities, they fell short of taking the House or Senate. This does not meaningfully shift the calculus for siting reform in the state as the Republican trifecta under Governor Mike Braun, who was not up for reelection, remains intact.
What else should we expect in 2027?
We expect siting and permitting to be a hot topic in 2027 and we will continue monitoring all state siting bills with our Legislative Tracker. For regular updates during legislative sessions, we encourage interested parties to sign up for our State of Siting newsletter, where we’ll summarize trends and key bills each month.
Dive into the data
Governor races
Vote shares, share of the expected vote counted, and race calls are from the AP. Pre-election, the consensus rating is MultiState's average of Cook, Sabato and Pluribus; polling margin is the RealClearPolling average; market odds average Polymarket and Kalshi. Results as of November 5, 2026 at 11:30 am ET.
Results
Top bar: the 2022 governor result. Bottom bar: the AP vote share now. The black line is 50%. R → D means the seat changed party. 2022 results from Wikipedia.
State legislatures
Results from MultiState's live results feed: seats decided so far plus senators not up this year, against each chamber's majority and supermajority lines. Pre-election ratings are Sabato's Crystal Ball. Results as of November 5, 2026 at 11:30 am ET.
Before and now, chamber by chamber
For each chamber, the top bar is the split going into the election and the bottom bar is seats now (decided seats plus senators not up), with gray still uncalled. The black line is half the seats. On the right, R → D or D → R means the chamber changed control (clinched, or MultiState's projection), and the arrow beside the seat count points toward the party that gained seats on net (R→D flips minus D→R flips). Chambers that changed control or lost a GOP supermajority are shaded and listed first, then by the size of the shift.
What shifted
Chambers that changed hands or lost a GOP supermajority are highlighted at the top. "Clinched" means a party already holds a majority of seats; "can't reach" means a party falls short even if it wins every uncalled seat. Where neither has happened, MultiState's projection is shown if it has made one.
| State | Chamber | Control | GOP supermajority | Seats now (D–R) | Uncalled | Seats flipped |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pennsylvania | Senate | Flipped to D (clinched) | 26–24 | 0 | 4 R→D, 1 D→R | |
| Texas | House | Flipped to D (clinched) | Not reached | 80–64 | 6 | 18 R→D |
| Wisconsin | Senate | Flipped to D (clinched) | 18–15 | 0 | 3 R→D | |
| Wisconsin | Assembly | Flipped to D (clinched) | 53–46 | 0 | 8 R→D | |
| Indiana | House | Held R (clinched) | Broken: R can’t reach 67 | 45–52 | 3 | 15 R→D |
| Iowa | House | Held R (clinched) | Broken: R can’t reach 67 | 43–52 | 5 | 10 R→D |
| Kansas | House | Held R (clinched) | Broken: R can’t reach 84 | 49–65 | 11 | 12 R→D |
| Missouri | House | Held R (clinched) | Broken: R can’t reach 109 | 68–93 | 2 | 16 R→D |
| Missouri | Senate | Held R (clinched) | Broken: R can’t reach 23 | 12–21 | 1 | 2 R→D |
| Ohio | House | Held R (clinched) | Broken: R can’t reach 60 | 42–52 | 5 | 8 R→D |
| Arizona | Senate | Undecided: D leads 15–8 | 15–8 | 7 | 2 R→D | |
| Arizona | House | Undecided: D leads 25–10 | 25–10 | 25 | 1 R→D | |
| Georgia | House | Undecided: D leads 88–84 | 88–84 | 8 | 9 R→D, 1 D→R | |
| Georgia | Senate | Held R (clinched) | 27–29 | 0 | 4 R→D | |
| Indiana | Senate | Held R (clinched) | Kept (34, line is 34) | 14–34 | 2 | 4 R→D |
| Iowa | Senate | Held R (clinched) | Not reached | 17–32 | 1 | 1 R→D, 1 D→R |
| Ohio | Senate | Held R (clinched) | Kept (21, line is 20) | 11–21 | 1 | 2 R→D |
| Pennsylvania | House | Held D (clinched) | 111–88 | 4 | 9 R→D | |
| Texas | Senate | Held R (clinched) | Kept (19, line is 18) | 12–19 | 0 | None |
| Kansas | Senate | No election (held R) | Not up (9–31) | None |