Mobility Monitor: The White House Legislative Plan for AI Falls Short on Education While Sanders and Khanna Move to Tax the Rich

Trump’s Legislative Priorities on AI Endanger the Future of Economic Mobility

Last month, the Trump administration released its National Legislative Framework for Artificial Intelligence (AI), informing Congress of his policy priorities for the industry for the coming year. The proposal comes as data centers and fears about AI-driven job displacement, particularly amongst white collar workers and recent college graduates, continue to mount. With a new class of college students preparing to walk across the stage and find employment this spring, the outrage over AI may grow.

But it’s not just younger, college-educated people who are concerned about AI. Data centers continue to be a unifying force amongst communities across the country who have organized to block projects and, more recently, mounted efforts to pass outright bans or moratoriums on data center development. Unfortunately, the Trump administration’s legislative proposals fall short of what the country needs to protect workers from labor market disruptions due to AI while actively working against the interests of communities fighting data centers. 

The Trump administration’s overall approach to AI has largely focused on meeting the needs of Big Tech leaders rather than harnessing federal power to protect the interests of workers and consumers. Part of this effort is establishing an air of inevitability around AI across all sectors. However, the actual impact of the latest round of AI tools on the broader economy remains unclear.

In the midst of technological change, it has been difficult for experts to parse out what claims are corporate grandstanding to attract investments or fire workers and the real effects of these tools on overall productivity. Regardless, generative AI tools like ChatGPT are undoubtedly changing the ways people work, learn and think.

The impacts of AI are especially salient in educational contexts as children and young people may be particularly vulnerable to the cognitive consequences of unregulated AI use. One of the more troubling aspects of the administration’s legislative framework is “Section VI: Educating Americans and Developing an AI-Ready Workforce,” which asks Congress to “incorporate AI training” into education programs and create “AI youth development programs.” 

Early research about the cognitive impacts of generative AI on high school and college students suggests that these tools foster dependence and limit the development of important brain functions like critical thinking and writing. Pushing to rapidly integrate AI into educational settings before clear scientific consensus emerges about its effects on students and safe ways to introduce the technology into the classroom could have negative consequences.

Although the first section of the legislative framework is about “Protecting Children and Empowering Parents,” this push to reshape schools and universities without intentional efforts to develop an evidence base and establish clear safety standards endangers the cognitive development of millions of children. 

The ramifications of prematurely integrating AI into the education system may only exacerbate existing educational inequities and worsen the long-term effects of AI displacement. The result could be devastating for economic mobility efforts, which has been built on the fundamental idea that building skills and expertise – whether that be through college, trade school or an apprenticeship – is rewarded in the labor market. Without the cognitive foundation to effectively learn new skills, allowing AI to enter the classroom without clear guidance and support for educators to implement it safely puts an entire generation’s career prospects in jeopardy. 

Data Centers Continue to Divide Washington and the Nation

When it comes to data centers, the administration’s legislative proposals are similarly concerning. The framework seeks to “streamline federal permitting for AI infrastructure construction and operation” as well as “preempt[ing] state AI laws that impose undue burdens,” making clear attempts to supersede state laws regulating AI. In the same breath, the framework also calls for the codification of the “ratepayer protection pledge” and restrictions on federal preemption over state zoning laws. 

On the one hand, the administration appears to be pushing to fast-track data center development past community interests while also endorsing several policies that would benefit communities. While the latter would be welcomed by many, the contradictions in the framework cloud the administration’s intentions, creating further confusion for communities trying to navigate the opaque process of data center construction. 

In the absence of federal leadership, states are stepping up to fill the regulatory gap. Maine recently became the first state to pass a statewide ban on data centers, which would pause development until November 2027 with no exemptions. The bill passed both chambers of the state legislature but was vetoed by Governor and US Senate candidate Janet Mills. 

Outside of Maine, there are at least 12 states (Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, Maryland, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin) who are considering data center bans. Last month, the first data center ban ballot referendum was passed in a small town in Wisconsin. The Trump administration may not have a coherent legislative framework for responsibly stewarding the buildout of AI infrastructure in the public interest, but states are filling the void and responding to the resounding voices of their communities. 

Sanders and Khanna Join Forces to Take on Billionaires

In other news, Senator Bernie Sanders and Congressman Ro Khanna introduced legislation in March that would establish a 5% annual wealth tax on the 938 billionaires in America. This move comes on the heels of a similar bill moving through California’s state legislature that is set to be decided by ballot referendum in November. The Sanders-Khanna bill would use the funds raised from the wealth tax to deliver direct payments of $3,000 to every adult and child in households making $150,000 or less in its first year. 

This means a family of four with two parents and two children would receive $12,000 in the first year. After that, the estimated $4.4 trillion in revenue raised from the tax over the next decade could be used on projects that support working families. As the nation faces an ever growing affordability crisis, the bill could provide much needed short-term relief for families while also setting the stage for future initiatives to improve economic security for struggling Americans.

In the meantime, Congress has been held up with budget negotiations around Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding, next year’s appropriations and the conflict in the Middle East. Looking ahead, Congress may move forward on the budget before the midterms to fulfill an emergency White House request for military funding to pay for the costs of attacking Iran. Notably, the Republican majority would have to make additional budget cuts to pay for the Pentagon’s requests not even a year after they drastically slashed the social safety net by cutting federal support for Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). 

The effects are already being felt by people across the country who are losing access to healthcare and cannot afford to eat. Fulfilling the White House request would mean additional cuts to the budget and even more pain and suffering for low- to moderate-income Americans all in order to pay for a war they had no say in. Affordability may have become a buzzword in American politics, but it is all too real for the millions of people struggling to make ends meet right now.

Simon Wang is the Economic Mobility Project Specialist with NCRC’s Economic Mobility team.

Photo credit: Ron Lach via Pexels.