The United States Must Reject Government Control of Artificial Intelligence

The United States Must Reject Government Control of Artificial Intelligence

The United States Must Reject Government Control of Artificial Intelligence

https://www.rstreet.org/commentary/the-united-states-must-reject-government-control-of-artificial-intelligence/

Publish Date: 2026-06-08 09:18:00

Source Domain: www.rstreet.org

Every major technological revolution—but especially information and communications technology (ICT) revolutions—eventually feature calls for far-reaching political controls. The argument is always the same: powerful technology must be centrally managed, or potentially even owned by the government, in the name of safety, security, job protection, wealth-sharing, etc.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become the latest example of this trend. In a remarkably short time, the Overton Window in AI policy has shifted multiple times. Examples include extreme calls for global development bans, and even potential nationalization following the debut of ChatGPT, and then again more recently following Anthropic’s warning that it viewed its new Claude “Mythos” model as too powerful for immediate public release.

After a brief period of policy moderation that featured efforts by the Trump administration and other lawmakers to encourage wider AI development, extreme proposals are back on the menu. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) argued recently that the government should own a 50 percent stake in large AI companies. Recent reports also state that some senior Trump administration officials have held preliminary discussions with major artificial intelligence companies like OpenAI and Anthropic about potential “partnerships” with the federal government to acquire shares in their firms or share profits in some fashion.

No matter what form nationalization takes—whether “hard” (outright government ownership) or “soft” (equity stakes or wealth-sharing “partnerships”)—these proposals share the dangerous common premise that AI is too important to be left to competitive markets and decentralized experimentation. They all entail government controlling algorithmic and computational technologies through top-down plans and pressure.

Whether this is being proposed by progressive liberals, conservative populists,…

Source