Stacey Abrams is a voting rights activist, lawyer, author and former minority leader in the Georgia House of Representatives from 2011 to 2017. She is a member of the Democratic Party who became the Democratic nominee in both the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election and the 2022 Georgia gubernatorial election.
Abrams founded the political organization Fair Fight Action in 2018, to address and combat voter suppression in Georgia and the United States, after her first run for governor, when her opponent Republican nominee Brian Kemp was accused of using his then Georgia Secretary of State office to intentionally cancel voter registrations. She is widely recognized for her voting rights advocacy, and building a network of organizations that boosted voter registration in Georgia.
I spoke to Abrams over the phone on Oct. 29, ahead of the 2026 Wisconsin gubernatorial election, as she was in Wisconsin to campaign with now governor-elect David Crowley and attend canvass events in Milwaukee and Oak Creek.
Stacey Abrams on DEI
Annabelle Hershelman: You have been an advocate of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs in the United States and say that DEI is a tool that needs expansion. How important do you think the ballot question centering on DEI is for Wisconsin voters?
Stacey Abrams: The ballot question is written to be benign. When you do not protect against discrimination, what you are saying is that there are no protections for those who are discriminated against.
DEI is a set of laws, rules and changes, that have made America more accessible. When conservatives talk about DEI, they reference the 13th Amendment, the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment and 19th Amendment.
It was Roe v. Wade. It was the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). It was the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). It was the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). So, anytime this country has passed laws that say ‘you can’t hurt this population anymore,’ that’s DEI.
When we see legislation that says “we won’t stop discrimination,” what they are saying is that “we will not correct mistakes we have made in the past, and we will make it illegal for you to fix those mistakes in the future.” That’s dangerous.
One example I would give for question three is: You are a disabled student who needs access to an Individualized Education Program (IEP). It used to be that if your school didn’t provide it, you could go to the U.S. Department of Education at the federal level, and the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) could compel compliance.
Under the phrasing of this ballot question, there is no obligation to provide that. People think DEI refers to whether or not students of color get extra opportunities, when it doesn’t. It instead covers any community that needs corrective action from government.
[Saying yes to the ballot question] would create a legal barrier in a constitution for the state legislature to fix systematic mistakes.
It isn’t outlawing discrimination; it is outlawing fixing that discrimination.
Stacey Abrams on AI
Hershelman: Recently, the Milwaukee Common Council passed a one-year pause on data center construction and development. What is your platform on artificial intelligence and data centers?
Abrams: I wrote a book called “Coded Justice,” which came out last year. It looks at AI and healthcare. AI could be incredibly helpful in making access to healthcare easier.
There are a lot of communities that don’t have doctors. Women may need different treatments and services than men do for the same diseases. AI is one of the tools we could use to improve the delivery of healthcare.
AI is not evil. The issue is deciding on how to use it, and who is in charge. AI is neither good nor bad; AI is a tool. You wouldn’t be mad at a hammer because someone uses it to hit you. It’s not the hammer; it is the person using it.
I think the data center process should be more intentional. Moratoriums are important because we are moving too fast without understanding the implications. The moratorium is a time to figure out the questions of who will pay for it and what the consequences will be when data centers have environmental effects.
I see data centers as an opportunity for people to get involved in understanding what is happening within their communities. Data centers don’t care about your race; they don’t care about your gender; they don’t care about your economics. They’re coming.
Our job is to figure out how to hold data centers accountable when they come to a community, and to decide whether or not they belong in communities. That is not a decision for politicians to make without community input.
Abrams on AI legislation and regulation
Hershelman: How should artificial intelligence should be tackled on a legislative level?
Abrams: Dario Amodei’s 3,800 word missive was about how fast artificial intelligence is growing and how there is a possibility that it could kill us all. What nobody paid attention to was the fact that he said “slow down AI.” He didn’t say “increase the speed of regulation.”
Regulation is good, because it signals that we are asking questions, and we are not going to risk other people until we have good answers. What I would say on behalf of the candidates that I have talked to here in Wisconsin, including David Crowley and Josh Kaul, is that regulation is not about stopping people from making a living. It’s about making sure that this technology that we don’t understand doesn’t make our decisions for us.
They are going to want the people to have a say, and they are going to want to regulate it.
It is important to have state leaders who aren’t answering to a president who believes AI shouldn’t have any regulation. Democrats believe that regulation is not the same as saying “no.” It is saying “how,” and David Crowley believes in saying “how.”