2025 was a wild political year.
Donald Trump’s return to power brought with it a return to the breakneck pace of political news. Some of those stories this year will indeed have a lasting effect on the country. But, as is the case with so many events in D.C., many did not make a lasting ripple outside of the Beltway (who, besides Booker himself, can remember a word of Cory Booker’s record-breaking filibuster?).
So instead of fixating on the drama inside the capital, I’m doing something different: recapping fourteen things that happened outside of D.C. this year that you should know. These events are more than mere local policy changes — they each tell us something big about the future, offering clues about where the country and the Democratic Party are headed in 2026.
New York enacts a full school phone ban
The research about the harmful effects of cell phones on young people has been clear for over a decade. Until 2025, though, efforts to limit cell phone use in schools were largely limited to red America: on January 1st, 2025, all of the states with statutory statewide bans had voted for Donald Trump in 2024.
This year, that changed. In May, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed a sweeping law instituting a bell-to-bell ban on all cell phone use by K-12 students during the school day. At the time, that made New York the largest and the bluest state to enact a ban on phone use in schools. It also added momentum for other states to enact full bans, rather than partial limitations or mandatory guidelines, and for the laws to spread to bluer states. In Virginia, for example, Democrats in the legislature worked with outgoing Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin to enact a full bell-to-bell ban this year.
It’s worth reflecting on the swiftness of the trend here: In 2023, Florida was the only state with a phone ban in schools. By the end of 2025, a growing number of states, red and blue, are moving there.
Data centers grow — and a backlash sprouts
Data center construction skyrocketed this year — bringing the first warning signs of real political backlash.
Construction of the centers increased sharply all over the world, but North America continued to lead the way: The money spent on new data center construction in the U.S. and Canada hit almost $50 billion in 2025, a nearly 50% increase from 2024. The rapid construction, its impact on local communities, and the centers’ soaring demand for electricity became a real political issue this year, from state legislative races to gubernatorial elections. It’s offered Democrats an inroad on high prices, as well as an easy rebuttal to conservatives who attribute them to climate policies. This issue is likely to rear its head more and more as the midterms approach, and, anecdotally, I think it could be truly potent in the coming years: Over Thanksgiving, I heard from conservative family members infuriated over the rise of the centers.
California enacts housing reform
When it comes to housing, California has been a symbol of everything about the nation’s crisis: High costs, low supply, slow development, rising homelessness, decades-old regulations weaponized by hostile forces, and blue states’ failure to tame it all. In 2025, state Democrats finally broke through decades of resistance and took some steps towards solutions.
This year, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed several major bills targeting the housing crisis from different angles. The bills include measures overriding local regulations to allow more development near transit, creating new housing targets for counties and cities, and exempting many developers from the state's environmental protection law. Notably, Newsom took a direct role in ushering the bills through, intervening to help force the legislature’s hand. The laws encapsulated the evolving politics of housing, as blue state governors — especially those with national ambitions — showed increased urgency around the issue this year.
Katie Hobbs helps overthrow Arizona’s Democratic chair
Early this year, it looked like infighting could overwhelm Arizona Democrats’ high-stakes 2026. Incumbent Secretary of State Adrian Fontes was threatening to primary Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, already one of the most vulnerable Democratic governors in the country. And the state Democratic Party was becoming an embarrassing spectacle: Every statewide elected Democrat, including Hobbs, Fontes, and the state's two senators, Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego, went to war against the party’s chairman, eventually succeeding in forcing a replacement this summer.
The turmoil could have real electoral implications for the state, which could go in wildly different directions next year: Hobbs’ re-election campaign is set to be one of the most competitive of the midterms, and Democrats are two seats shy of flipping both houses of the state’s legislature. More than that, it points to broader changes within the Democratic Party this year. After years in which the threat of Trump helped party leadership clear primaries and minimize dissent, long-suppressed debates and fights spilled out into the open this year, with far less deference to party unity. Heated debates over the party’s direction continue to play out in the media and there are crowded, rowdy primaries for governor and Senate all over the country, from Michigan and Wisconsin to Maine and Georgia. 2018, this is not.
New Mexico begins a huge childcare experiment
In November, Michelle Lujan Grisham made a simple but extraordinary announcement: New Mexico would now provide free public child care to all residents. The governor enacted the policy without signing any new law, instead eliminating all income eligibility from an existing child care program. The move made New Mexico the first state in U.S. history to offer fully funded child care to all parents. It’s a fitting focus for Lujan Grisham — she previously served as the state’s health secretary and was vetted to be Joe Biden’s HHS Secretary.
The state has now begun a high-stakes experiment, the ramifications of which will be felt across the country. If the program succeeds — and it is still very much in its infancy — it could become a model for other states, not to mention a legacy achievement for Lujan Grisham, who leaves office in 2027.
Andy Beshear and Gretchen Whitmer are elected to lead the DGA
In recent years, heading a party’s association of governors has become a telltale sign of national ambition; figures like Chris Christie, Mitt Romney, Martin O’Malley, and Tim Walz have all used the perch to elevate their national profile and forge relationships with donors. So it was a notable development when Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer were elected as the new chair and vice chair of the Democratic Governors Association this December.
From my conversations, Beshear is far more certain to run for president in 2028. But the new positions, which will last through the 2026 midterms, give both of them a reason to travel the country and pop up in national news media.
Pay transparency laws spread in blue states
The move towards so-called “pay transparency” continued in 2025. In 2021, Colorado became the first state in the country to require businesses to disclose pay scales and benefits in job listings. Advocates for the laws, who argue they help enhance worker’s bargaining power, and can help close racial and gender pay gaps, saw further success this year.
Five states — Vermont, Illinois, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Minnesota — saw pay transparency laws come into effect in 2025. A sixth, Delaware, enacted its own law, which will go into effect in 2027. That brings the total number of states with laws on the books to 14, covering more than 120 million Americans. It’s further evidence of the ever-widening gap between blue and red states’ policies: All but one of the 14 voted for Kamala Harris in 2024.
Newsom and Beshear launch podcasts
Both Gavin Newsom and Andy Beshear launched their own podcasts this year, with varying success. Newsom’s was first out of the gate and made by far the bigger splash: The aptly titled “This Is Gavin Newsom” garnered big attention for featuring friendly discussions with conservatives like Steve Bannon and Charlie Kirk. Beshear followed several months later with the even more creatively named “Andy Beshear Podcast.”
Neither is likely to have a huge impact longterm. But both men’s shows reflected the evolving political information landscape this year. A growing number of politicians in both parties are making a foray into the podcasting world, and, after 2024, liberals in particular have developed a new appreciation for the medium. Most of all, it proves how much the rules of politics and geography have changed. Governors’ lack of proximity to the capital and national press used to be a key liability in running for president. Now, it’s never been easier for politicians outside of D.C. to insert themselves into the national narrative, a development with real implications for the 2028 primaries.
Democrats evolve on transgender sports participation
In the debut episode of his podcast, Gavin Newsom made an announcement that shocked many of his allies: He now felt that trans girls and women participating in girls’ and women’s sports was “deeply unfair.” While other Democrats had made similar remarks last winter, Newsom’s comments were by far the most notable. Not only is he a deep blue state governor, a former San Francisco mayor who has long bragged of his pro-LGBTQ bona fides, but he is an almost certain 2028 candidate. That he was moving this way seemed a clear signal of where the political wind was blowing.
Overall, those winds did become more muddled as the year went on. But on this issue specifically, there was a clear movement among Democrats towards moderation on this issue. Over the course of the year, a number of Democratic state legislators backed Republican bills banning transgender sports participation. This Fall, maybe the second-most likely 2028 candidate, Josh Shapiro, told The Atlantic that he condemns trans children being “persecuted and bullied” but also opposes them having “an unfair advantage on the playing field.” How one reconciles those positions remains an open question, intentionally so. I remain of the view that the 2024 trans sports focus bears a strong resemblance to the “War on Women” narrative of 2012 — a few rhetorical tweaks can go a long way to neutralizing the issue next time around. But, wherever you personally stand on the issue, the movement this year was clear: The median Democrats’ public position on this issue is now a lot different from, say, 2021.
The NGA fractures
The National Governors Association has traditionally been insulated from the worst of politics. The chairmanship rotates between the parties every other year, and the organization has long focused on the most inoffensive, bipartisan goals. But like so many other civic institutions, it’s seen that identity tested in the second Trump era: This year, amid the federal government’s increasingly aggressive forays into state matters, multiple Democratic governors suspended or threatened to suspend their involvement with the group.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly officially split from the group this summer, citing its lack of pushback on the administration and failure to defend states’ independence. Kelly’s decision was especially notable: Not only was she the chair of the Democratic Governors Association, but she’s far from a partisan bomb-thrower. Michigan’s Gretchen Whitmer dropped out shortly after and, months later, Illinois J.B. Pritzker and California’s Gavin Newsom threatened to do the same, singling out the administration’s precedent-defying deployment of other states’ National Guard forces in their borders (Newsom eventually decided to stay in the group but stop paying dues). The spat underscored several key political trends this year, including the swift decline of many independent institutions — and Democrats’ growing impatience with them.
On Trump, Whitmer covers her bases — and her face
At the beginning of the year, it wasn’t clear how Democrats would — or should — respond to Trump’s second term. Both parties seemed acutely aware of how different the landscape was from 2017. There were no airport protests or women’s marches. Tech giants and big business bowed to the new administration. And, above all, a swath of Democrats were chastened enough by their party’s defeat that they signaled a real willingness to work with the new administration. Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer became a prominent member of that camp, staking out nuanced positions on issues like tariffs and pledging to find “common ground” with the administration.
That decision ultimately came to define her year: Her play-nice approach did help secure some major wins for her state (the chief responsibility, it bears remembering, of any governor), but it left a lasting mark on Whitmer’s position in the party. The photo of Whitmer hiding her face in the Oval Office will be a hard image for any Democratic voter to get out of their heads if she ultimately runs in 2028. Some operatives I’ve talked to doubt she ultimately will. If they’re right, her decisions this year could make more sense.
Josh Green and Maura Healey tease runs for president
President Josh Green? President Maura Healey?
You’d be forgiven if those names don’t ring a bell. Green, the governor of Hawaii, and Healey, the governor of Massachusetts, aren’t exactly household names. Nor do they occupy a particular ideological or personal niche in the Democratic Party. Both were elected in 2022 after working their way up the traditional ladder; Green served four years as Hawaii’s Lieutenant Governor, Healey was Massachusetts’ Attorney General for eight. Neither is often included in the (already long) list of governors angling for the White House. This year, though, both openly hinted about potentially mounting runs for president.
People I’ve talked to doubt either is likely to actually enter the 2028 race. But their flirtation is notable less for their own ambitions and more for what it says about the party overall: A new crop of Democratic governors is growing increasingly assertive and increasingly convinced one of their own must be the party’s standard bearer next cycle.
Democrats recalibrate on climate change
By year’s end, the indecision that defined Democrats’ early posture towards Trump has mostly faded away: The combination of Trump’s conduct and declining popularity has largely jolted the party back towards the kind of capital-R resistance of his first term.
On climate change, though, the picture is more complicated. This year, we saw the emergence of a noticeably more nuanced climate position from many state Democrats — with several governors, including Kathy Hochul, Gavin Newsom, Wes Moore, and Josh Shapiro, walking back ambitious emissions targets, canning climate change studies, or approving new gas pipelines. There are a number of things at play, including the memory of the party’s sprint to the left during Trump 1. Kamala Harris’s struggles last year to explain her previous positions is an especially strong warning for would-be 2028 contenders.
But there’s another reason, larger than American political trends: All over the world, the politics of affordability are proving powerful enough to override other concerns. Center-left parties from Canada to Europe have moderated on climate in recent years, slowing their transitions away from fossil fuels and embracing an “all of the above” energy strategy in the meantime. And the tension between climate and affordability politics is not going away any time soon.
Jared Polis blocks new tech regulations
This spring, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis vetoed a bill that would have banned the use of algorithms to set rental prices in the state, infuriating many in his party. The measure targeted companies like RealPage, which allow landlords to plug in certain information and receive an optimal rent price on the other side. Critics say practices like these, enabled by the rise of AI, amount to collusion and price fixing.
Polis disagreed, killing the measure. It was one of several instances this year in which he vetoed tech regulations, including some that passed with Republican support. Those decisions matter beyond Colorado: Not only is Polis a potential 2028 contender, but he has staked out ground as one of the most affordability-focused and “Abundance”-aligned Democrats in the country, often breaking from his party to be more pro-business and anti-regulation. His moves this year speak to the tension between affordability-focused politics and the rising strain of tech-skeptical populism within the Democratic Party. Other Democrats may not come to the same conclusion, but they may soon have to make similar choices.
That’s all for this week — I’ll be back in your inbox next Wednesday.
Merry Christmas and happy holidays.
Got feedback on today’s newsletter? Email me [email protected]