Lehane's proposal
Chris Lehane, OpenAI's chief global affairs officer, has published an essay arguing that the 2028 presidential election could mark a decisive moment for artificial intelligence and urging politicians to develop policies that address Americans' concerns instead of merely riding anti-AI sentiment and discontent toward data centers. According to Lehane, as reported by TechCrunch, AI's impact on the economy is comparable to that of Roosevelt's New Deal and the federal programs of the 1930s after industrialization and the Great Depression.
The executive identifies five priorities: worker protections, education, AI safety, data center development and tax incentives. Among the suggested measures are benefits for those learning AI-related skills, easier access to capital for entrepreneurs, and new models of employee equity participation and profit sharing.
The political context and the skepticism
The essay comes after a Democratic victory in the midterm elections, with Congress won amid discontent over the cost of living. Kate Brennan, who leads AI and corporate power policy at the AI Now Institute, told TechCrunch that Lehane's rhetoric marks a shift from last year's agenda, which focused on accelerated development, fewer regulatory barriers and more infrastructure.
Brennan, however, disputes the use of the New Deal reference: according to the analyst, the document is written by a private company promoting policies to its own advantage, and can be described as “ahistorical at best and harmful at worst.” The criticism also extends to the tax proposals, which do not impose binding obligations to guarantee workers a share of the wealth generated by AI or to make companies pay the costs of job displacement.
Data centers, safety and the regulatory question
On data centers, Lehane acknowledges the concerns but emphasizes jobs and local tax revenue; he then warns that those supporting a moratorium risk undermining the United States' advantage over China, comparing that position to the 2002 vote that authorized the war in Iraq. On safety, he calls for enforceable standards, independent evaluations, public oversight and the ability to shut down systems.
Brennan calls these positions insincere, recalling that in 2024 OpenAI opposed California's SB 1047, which would have imposed catastrophic-risk assessments and shutdown capabilities, and that the following year it sought to limit state regulation. The company has since partly changed its positions, supporting some state laws and declaring itself open to independent internal evaluators.
What remains to be verified
The text leaves the central question open: whether the proposed policies would truly redistribute power or consolidate it. The available information does not allow this to be determined. TechCrunch reports that it asked OpenAI for further details on the proposals and the company's positions without receiving a response before publication. It therefore remains to be clarified which measures would become concrete commitments and which would remain statements of intent.
