AI's Election Reckoning

Americans harbor significant concerns about artificial intelligence, yet the extent to which these worries will influence the upcoming midterm elections remains uncertain.

While a majority of Americans express apprehension about AI, communities nationwide have actively resisted data center projects, causing delays and cancellations. On social media, the frustration directed at AI companies and their executives is palpable, at times escalating to the point of condoning violence.

However, when examining the primary issues dominating most political campaigns, AI's prominence is considerably lower, according to expert analysis.

An Ipsos poll conducted earlier this year revealed that over 60 percent of both Republican and Democratic respondents agree on the necessity of government regulation for AI to ensure economic stability and public safety, advocating for a deceleration of the technology's development. Despite this consensus, Alec Tyson, lead pollster for Ipsos Public Affairs, notes, “when you just ask folks, ‘what’s on your mind?’ AI and data centers aren’t rising to the top of the list — at least not yet.”

Currently, broader concerns such as the economy and immigration continue to be top priorities for many voters. Tyson explains, “There’s a certain amount of oxygen for the top issues that Americans have on their mind, and we are living in a very active moment. The amount of available space or potential for another issue to break through, it has to be a pretty acute or powerful concern. And we’re just not seeing that at the national level with AI yet.”

Furthermore, the issue of AI lacks clear partisan divisions. Data Center Watch, an organization monitoring data center projects and opposition, reported that 55 percent of politicians publicly opposing large projects were Republicans, with 45 percent being Democrats. Bipartisan concern also extends to the potential impact of AI chatbot companions on children. Although Republican politicians have often spearheaded efforts to overturn state AI laws, significant disagreement persists within both major parties.

Nevertheless, with months remaining until the election, debates and conflicts surrounding AI are intensifying. Tech leaders are issuing stark warnings about the technology's potential to disrupt lives; Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has cautioned that AI could eliminate half of all entry-level white-collar positions, while Palantir CEO Alex Karphas suggested that Democratic voters might experience a decline in economic power, conversely benefiting “working-class, often male voters.” Activists have mounted resistance, largely through peaceful protests and appeals to lawmakers. Yet, some opposition has turned violent, exemplified by the alleged attacks on Sam Altman’s home by three suspects over several days, with some social media responses appearing to justify these actions. This violence, reminiscent of public reactions following the killing of UnitedHealthcare’s CEO, underscores a deep-seated frustration among Americans.

Concurrently, well-funded interest groups are already investing millions in lobbying efforts. Tyson observes that “a lot of political science has well-documented that everyday Americans in some ways follow the rhetoric or position of the leaders they align with.” Groups like Brad Carson’s Americans for Responsible Innovation are dedicated to informing policymakers about AI to prepare them for upcoming policy discussions. Carson, a former Democratic congressman, opposes attempts to override state AI regulations and is also involved with Public First Action, an organization affiliated with super PACs committed to supporting candidates who will champion public safeguards against AI. Public First Action, with $50 million cash on hand—$20 million of which originated from Anthropic—serves as a counterpoint to Leading the Future, a super PAC primarily financed by OpenAI president Greg Brockman and tech investors Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, which has reportedly raised $140 million.

Data centers have already emerged as a significant point of contention at the local level. Opposition to these developments has successfully blocked or delayed projects valued at $64 billion nationwide, according to Data Center Watch. At the federal level, lawmakers such as Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) advocate for a moratorium on data center expansion.

Candidates campaigning on specific AI platforms have already attracted funding from groups like Leading the Future (LTF) and Public First Action (PFA). This was the case for New York State lawmaker Alex Bores, currently seeking reelection, who co-sponsored legislation aimed at establishing safety and transparency requirements for large AI model developers. Despite LTF's considerably larger financial resources, Carson maintains that public opinion aligns with his stance, asserting that now is the opportune moment to challenge efforts to impede state regulations.

Concerns regarding job displacement could also rapidly become a primary concern for voters this summer, predicts Brendan Steinhauser, CEO of The Alliance for Secure AI, a nonprofit dedicated to "defending humanity" in the age of AI. He states, “Based on what the technology is doing, and based on what leaders in the industry are saying about the technology, I think that gives me a signal that it could happen really fast.” Tyson adds that the impact on jobs is a particularly pressing concern for many in Gen Z.

The Alliance maintains an online tracker documenting layoffs attributed to AI, which has so far tallied over 110,000 job losses in the U.S., including 30,000 from Oracle alone. Steinhauser anticipates that the threat will soon become more broadly evident as job losses are expected to affect diverse sectors, from the legal profession to general administrative roles. “That’s when I think it’s going to really be a much more salient issue across the country,” he remarks.

Carson frequently hears from pollsters that “they’ve never seen an issue rise up those ranks faster than AI is.” While many voters may not spontaneously raise AI as a concern, he notes that “if you introduce the idea of AI and then raise things like price concerns or job concerns, they’re very salient.” However, voting solely on AI issues may still prove challenging. “The candidates themselves aren’t necessarily clearly differentiated on how they want to approach AI because it’s a nascent and emerging issue,” he explains.

If voters are not yet deeply engaged with AI issues, why are industry leaders investing millions in campaigns? Experts suggest it is because substantial gains are still to be made. Daniel Schiff, an associate political science professor at Purdue University, comments, “That public story is a little bit different from who actually has power.” He illustrates that headlines about Anthropic’s decision to resist the Pentagon on issues like mass domestic surveillance, while potentially not reaching many American voters, could nonetheless aid in “positioning themselves with respect to the government.”

Carson believes AI is “a great issue to run on” because “most politicians are just now waking up to how powerful public sentiment is about guardrails on AI. But you’re going to see more and more people embrace it because an entrepreneurial politician sees the opening here.” Acknowledging the formidable opposition from billionaires backing groups like Leading the Future, Carson defiantly states, “will try to destroy you, but there’s a limit to that, right? They can’t destroy us all.”