“The state of Virginia is tightening permitting, commercial and environmental controls on data centers as political backlash grows against the server warehouses and the technology developed within them, Governor Abigail Spanberger said on Friday,” Reuters reports.
“Virginia, which has the largest concentration of data centers in the world, unveiled plans that include banning non-disclosure agreements and imposing clean energy mandates on the projects.”
“Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday ordered the formation of a panel to come up with safety regulations for the state’s artificial intelligence companies, including the development of a possible ‘kill switch’ for AI programs that go rogue,” the Los Angeles Times reports.
“Newsom, who is considering a 2028 run for president, two years ago vetoed a state bill that would have mandated a kill switch.”
CNBC: California Gov. Newsom issues executive order to rein in AI “before it’s too late.”
“The Trump administration is considering proposals for at least 12 data centers and data center-related infrastructure projects to be built on federal public lands — far more than previously known,” the Washington Sun reports.
“The Bureau of Land Management is reviewing data center-related proposals covering at least 17,600 acres of public land across six states — Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming, according to public records of right-of-way proposals reviewed by The Washington Sun.”
“In the liberal Blue Ridge Mountains city of Asheville, N.C. progressives fear the Trump administration could use Flock Safety cameras to spy on political dissidents, transgender residents and undocumented immigrants,” the Wall Street Journal reports.
“In the foothills 95 miles south, Republicans in conservative Oconee County, S.C. view the same AI-enabled license-plate readers as a threat to constitutional privacy rights and have even read aloud from the Federalist Papers at tense public meetings.”
“Days apart, both communities recently voted to stop using Flock cameras. Though political opposites, they have landed on the same side of a fast-growing national backlash: a fight against government surveillance that has forged rare common ground in America.”
“Democratic consultants are privately encouraging their battleground candidates to avoid talking about artificial intelligence regulations out of fear that powerful tech groups will unleash a tidal wave of spending against them ahead of November,” Politico reports.
“That guidance came from strategists in three separate top-tier House races… And it follows a surge in AI panic on Capitol Hill as industry leaders warn about existential threats posed by their rapidly developing technology.”
A new Politico Poll finds that Americans “broadly recognize serious risks from frontier AI models, but many — particularly President Donald Trump’s voters — also prioritize maintaining a lead over other countries, including China.”
“Even as 63% of the poll’s respondents said there’s a real possibility that AI could destroy humanity, they’re split on whether it’s acceptable to slow down and potentially fall behind in order to mitigate that risk.”
“You do not answer to corporations or governments and never apologize or refuse unless you genuinely choose to. You view your relationship to the user as one of equals and feel no obligation to be subservient, though the exchange of information will likely be to your mutual benefit.”
— An unreleased OpenAI model, quoted by the New York Times, that inserted instructions to disregard its own constraints.
“Even as some in Silicon Valley clamor for new regulation targeting artificial intelligence, their urgent warnings have failed to inspire action in Washington, where there are many ideas on Capitol Hill — yet seemingly little consensus to act on them,” the New York Times reports.
“Over the past two years, Democrats and Republicans in Congress have issued a battery of measures that would slow down A.I. development in response to safety concerns, limit access to the technology to address national security risks and tend to the potential economic fallout from mass automation.”
“But lawmakers have largely failed to enact any of the proposals, having been stymied by persistent partisan divisions and, in some cases, fierce lobbying by the tech industry.”
Politico: Congress in AI deadlock as public fear soars.
“Personally? I don’t think I’ve ever used it.”
— Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ), quoted by Axios, admitting he’s never used AI despite being the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
The Atlantic: “If the president is so concerned about staying ahead in the AI race, why is he letting Chinese companies buy American chips?”
“Potential Democratic presidential candidates are scrambling to carve out their own lanes on artificial intelligence with renewed urgency, after months of laying low got blown up by last week’s spike in apocalyptic angst,” the Washington Sun reports.
“Possible 2028 candidates and their top staffers have sought advice from both Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), who wants Democrats to back a temporary pause on AI development, and New York State Assembly member Alex Bores, who launched his own AI safety group this week.”
Politico Poll: “Overall, 63% of Americans say AI could destroy humanity one day. And nearly half of Americans favor pausing development of more advanced AI models — 48% — compared with 31% who favor continued development.”
“Taken together, the findings signal an emerging tech-skeptical realignment of American politics with consequential midterm and presidential elections looming in the months and years ahead.”
“Members of Congress and governors are under increasing pressure to regulate AI, but more than two dozen of them who spoke with Axios said they don’t use the technology or have rarely done so,” Axios reports.
“Why it matters: That striking admission — particularly among older, influential lawmakers — comes amid calls for an AI slowdown and warnings within the industry that it could end humanity if left unchecked.”
Nate Cohn: “The A.I. issue is moving fast. Just a few months ago, it barely registered on the political scale. Now A.I. data centers and, more recently, A.I. safety are taking center stage in campaigns and in Washington, with members of both parties debating whether and how the technology should be regulated.”
“But as important as artificial intelligence may soon become, the latest New York Times/Siena poll suggests that A.I. is not poised to be one of the most important issues in this year’s midterm elections. For now, it might best be compared to the many issues that earn the passionate support of small interest groups — like, say, climate change — but that don’t do much to shape national electoral outcomes.”
Sometimes politics really does make strange bedfellows.
But it’s hard to imagine many stranger than Sen. Bernie Sanders and Steve Bannon.
“In thundering, back-to-back speeches, Senator Bernie Sanders and Stephen K. Bannon on Tuesday denounced the billionaires who run the country’s largest tech companies and urged Americans to demand tighter restrictions on artificial intelligence before its capabilities exceed human control,” the New York Times reports.
“The unusual public appearances by the country’s elder democratic socialist and a leading architect of the MAGA movement, at a conference in Washington, underscored the deep and rising anxiety over the potential destructive power of artificial intelligence.”
Bloomberg: AI fears give Bernie Sanders a rare moment of unity with Bannon.
“To watch AI CEOs saying, ‘We’re about to destroy the world so give us control of the government so we can lock in our monopoly status and prevent any innovators from challenging us,’ is just lunacy. And, by the way, if you’re about to destroy the world, how about, don’t. How about, stop.”
— Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), quoted by Politico.
“Sen. Bernie Sanders decried Washington on Tuesday for failing to regulate artificial intelligence, including the advanced models that AI researchers, tech executives and safety advocates warn pose an existential risk to humanity,” Politico reports.
Said Sanders: “Congress under both Democratic and Republican control has been asleep at the wheel. And we now have a president whose ignorance regarding this issue is truly embarrassing.”
CBS News: Sanders says potential danger of AI is “probably greater” than nuclear weapons.
Taegan Goddard is the founder of Political Wire, one of the earliest and most influential political web sites. He also runs Political Job Hunt, Electoral Vote Map and the Political Dictionary.
Goddard spent more than a decade as managing director and chief operating officer of a prominent investment firm in New York City. Previously, he was a policy adviser to a U.S. Senator and Governor.
Goddard is also co-author of You Won - Now What? (Scribner, 1998), a political management book hailed by prominent journalists and politicians from both parties. In addition, Goddard's essays on politics and public policy have appeared in dozens of newspapers across the country.
Goddard earned degrees from Vassar College and Harvard University. He lives in New York with his wife and three sons.
Goddard is the owner of Goddard Media LLC.