As the US midterms approach, AI is going to emerge as a key issue concerning voters | Nathan E Sanders and Bruce Schneier
TL;DR
The Trump administration issued an executive order blocking US states from regulating AI independently, threatening lawsuits and funding cuts against states that try.
Key Points
- The move openly sided with industry lobbyists and undermined years of advocacy for state-level AI oversight by consumer and safety groups.
- Authors Nathan E Sanders and Bruce Schneier argue AI is set to become a defining issue in the 2026 midterm elections, yet few politicians are staking out clear positions.
- They call on candidates across party lines to articulate concrete stances on how and where AI should be governed.
Nauti's Take
Trump's executive order did exactly what industry lobbyists have wanted for years: swept away the patchwork of state regulations – not by replacing them with robust federal law, but by creating a clean regulatory vacuum. That is not AI policy, that is market protection for the biggest players.
Sanders and Schneier are right that the midterms offer a chance to change the conversation, but optimism that voters will prioritize AI governance seems premature as long as neither party is willing to seriously advocate for accountability when AI causes harm.
Context
The executive order is not a bureaucratic technicality – it determines who actually sets the rules for AI in the US: the federal government, individual states, or effectively the industry itself. Since state-level regulation has historically served as a testing ground for federal law, gutting it represents a significant setback for evidence-based AI policy. The midterms may be the first real test of whether AI governance can mobilize voters as a standalone issue, or whether it gets drowned out by other political noise.
Video
Sources