As Republicans and Democrats sort through new federal policies regulating the Artificial Intelligence industry, a leading progressive on Capitol Hill is calling on presidential candidates in his party to reject donations from AI billionaires, arguing it’s a chance for Democrats to draw a clear contrast with Republicans on what he says could be the “defining issue” of this election cycle and the next.

In an interview with MS NOW this week, Rep. Greg Casar of Texas — the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus — called recent protests against data centers “just the initial tremors of the earthquake that’s coming if people start losing their jobs in a big way.” 

“If someone wants to win the presidential nomination, they should start taking these cues now,” Casar said. 

Specifically, Casar wants Democrats to refuse the help of Leading the Future — a prominent pro-AI super PAC — and “AI billionaires that are lobbying for no regulation.”

“We need to clearly be 100% on the side of workers who are vulnerable, kids who are vulnerable, everyday people who are vulnerable to mass surveillance,” Casar said. 

But if 2026 is any indication, Leading the Future could spend big in 2028.

As of the end of June, data compiled by OpenSecrets for MS NOW shows that Leading the Future and its affiliates had raised more than $76.5 million so far this cycle. The group had also already spent tens of millions of dollars in electoral contests — some of that backing Republicans, some backing Democrats.

OpenSecrets’ director of insights, Brendan Glavin, told MS NOW that the AI spending this year looks like a “prelude” to what’s going to happen in 2028.

Asked about the financial implications for Democrats if they disavowed cash from the AI industry, Casar suggested the greater risk may be having their backing. 

He predicted that in two years, Sam Altman — the CEO of OpenAI — would be “as big a villain to Democrats as Elon Musk is today.” And Leading the Future and the “big anti-AI regulation donors,” he said, would be “as toxic as AIPAC is today.”

“If Democrats clearly stand with the 75% plus of Americans that want sensible AI regulations to prevent mass unemployment, mass surveillance, or mass national security risks, I think we should win over the voters,” Casar said.

“Even if it means we don’t win over all the money,” he added.

Drawing a line in the sand on artificial intelligence, Casar argued, would also allow Democrats to paint a clear contrast with the GOP — including, in particular, one potential Republican presidential candidate: Vice President JD Vance. 

Casar told MS NOW he sees Vance as particularly vulnerable on this issue.

Before arriving in elected office, Vance worked in venture capital in San Francisco. He has ties to the tech sector. He helped co-found a Silicon Valley-backed donor organization to back right-wing political initiatives. 

“AI corruption is a big liability for a JD Vance presidential campaign,” Casar said. “He’s more Silicon Valley than Ohio, more tech bro than factory guy.” 

In recent months, Vance has expressed concern that the benefits of AI may predominantly help the wealthy — while also downplaying its potential impact on the job market.

“I have not yet seen the evidence that you’re going to see widespread job destruction because of AI,” he told the Atlantic in June.

Casar said that if the U.S. experiences mass layoffs tied to artificial intelligence by 2028, Democrats “should make sure every voter sees” that comment.

“It’s going to look as if George H. W. Bush’s ‘Read My Lips, No New Taxes’ and Mitt Romney’s 47% comments had a baby,” he said.

Vance’s team did not immediately respond to MS NOW’s request for comment.

Leading the Future also did not respond to outreach from MS NOW.

Of course, Casar is not disavowing money from everyone tied to the AI industry — including, he said, “everyday tech workers” who could be part of the Democratic coalition.

“There’s certainly AI researchers who are genuinely worried about national security risks, genuinely worried about mass unemployment, and want to inform elected officials about what’s really going on inside these firms,” Casar said.

“But,” he added, “the small number of people who are cutting massive checks to stop AI regulation — those people should be seen as villains by the Democratic Party.”

Casar wants to see his party get consistent on the issue — and avoid what he believes were mistakes in how Democrats navigated another piece of technology that recently burst onto the scene: crypto.

On that issue, Casar argued, Democrats “let big money divide us as a party and confuse our position.”

On Thursday, Casar introduced a bill to tax AI companies, with the goal of curtailing job losses. Under the bill, the tax revenue would establish a new Work Protection Administration, which would aim to offset AI layoffs by issuing grants to create jobs in sectors like construction and childcare. 

Casar also told MS NOW that he wants Democrats to pass legislation strengthening AI safety — like by mandating independent safety testing, imposing disclosure requirements for security incidents, and banning “artificial superintelligence.” 

If Democrats win control of either chamber of Congress, Casar also would like to see committee chairmen bring in AI CEOs to testify.

That sort of high-profile, hard-line stance could help Democrats, Casar suggested.

Indeed, on the campaign trail this year, there are early signs that the AI debate is resonating with voters. 

At a polling place in Virginia this week, a Republican primary voter told MS NOW the number of data centers being constructed is “out of control.” 

“They’re just building them at such a quick speed and pushing them through,” Robyn Castles of Fredericksburg, Va., told MS NOW. “I think we need to take a breath and think about a lot of the things that we’re doing to our people, our environment, our rivers.”

Last month, protesters railing against data centers interrupted a speech by President Donald Trump in Michigan — where residents have raised concerns about the impact the new structures have on water and electricity supplies.

And a recent survey from Gallup showed about 39% of U.S. adults believe AI does more harm than good — compared with just 9% who say it does more good than harm. (Fifty-two percent said equal parts good and bad.)

But as Casar calls for Democrats to take a cue from what’s happening on the ground, he wouldn’t directly answer whether he believes all Democratic candidates will heed his recommendation.

“That’s why we have a democratic primary process,” Casar said.

The post ‘As toxic as AIPAC’: Progressive leader wants Dems to reject AI cash appeared first on MS NOW.

From MS Now.