House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) speaks during a press conference at the US Capitol on November 11, 2025, in Washington, DC.
Hakeem Jeffries Pilloried for Putting Pro-Industry Democrats on AI Policy Task Force, Despite Voter Distrust of Big Tech
"This is the most populist moment of voter rage I've ever seen, and the leading Democrats are absolutely hostile to the idea of doing anything to address Silicon Valley's massive power," said one anti-monopoly expert.
At a time when the American public, and especially Democratic voters, express overwhelming distrust of artificial intelligence and Big Tech, the top House Democrat is being accused of failing to meet the moment.
On Tuesday, in preparation for an executive order to be signed this week by President Donald Trump, which would seek to block states from implementing new AI regulations, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) unveiled his own effort to cozy up to the industry, whose major players have set aside more than $200 million to push out anti-AI politicians during the 2026 midterms, according to the New York Times.
Jeffries announced the creation of a “House Democratic Commission on AI and the Innovation Economy,” which will “develop policy expertise in partnership with the innovation community, relevant stakeholders, and committees of jurisdiction.”
What immediately caught the eye of critics was the list of fellow Democrats Jeffries picked to serve on the commission. It will be co-chaired by Reps. Ted Lieu (Calif.), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), and Valerie Foushee (NC), with Reps. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.) and Frank Pallone (NJ) serving as ex officio co-chairs.
As Sludge reported Tuesday: "The panel’s leaders rank among the House Democrats with the deepest ties to Big Tech and AI, from holding millions of dollars in tech stock to the contributions they’ve raised for their campaigns and the Republican-backed deregulation bills they've signed onto."
In July, Gottheimer introduced a bill along with Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) "that would require financial regulators to create 'AI Innovation Labs' where firms could experiment with AI-driven financial products under looser regulations and without the normal threats of enforcement actions."
Gottheimer is also a major stakeholder in Microsoft, which has invested tens of millions of dollars into AI and nearly $7.5 million on lobbying in 2025 so far. Beyond the almost $100,000 in contributions Gottheimer has received from Microsoft, he is also a former executive who received anywhere from $1 million to $5 million last year from his stock holdings in the company, according to financial disclosure forms. He also frequently trades in other AI power players like Amazon, Meta, and Dell.
Lofgren, meanwhile, has accepted more money from the Internet industry over the course of her career than all but one other current House Democrat—including $265,000 from Google, $115,000 from Apple, and $110,000 from Meta, according to data from OpenSecrets.
In September 2024, Lofgren co-sponsored a bill introduced by Rep. Jay Abernolte (R-Calif.) which "would create a federal 'center for AI advancement and reliability' that it would instruct to work closely with private companies and other stakeholders on developing 'voluntary best practices and technical standards for evaluating the reliability, robustness, resilience, security, and safety of artificial intelligence systems.'"
Foushee, a member of the corporate-backed New Democrat Coalition, rode to Congress in 2022 with more than $1 million from the Protect Our Future political action committee, which was backed by former FTX CEO and convicted fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried.
In response to Trump's industry-friendly "AI Action Plan" in July, Foushee and the New Democrats unveiled their own "Innovation Agenda," which called for federal tax credits to companies that "reskill" workers and perform private research and development as well as federal investments in apprenticeships and "labor market data modernization."
Jeffries has neglected to take a position on Trump's proposal to preempt state regulations. Last Monday, he told reporters, "That conversation hasn't been brought to the leadership level yet."
In his statement announcing the Democratic commission on Tuesday, Jeffries said, "It is important that American companies continue to thrive" in the arena of AI, while "at the same time, Congress must consider what policies are needed to prevent bad actors from exploiting this transformative technology and inflicting harm upon the American people." However, he did not specifically mention Trump's pending block on state regulations.
A poll released Friday by the progressive group Demand Progress showed that Americans across the political spectrum are unsettled by AI's influence in Washington: 68% of respondents overall said they were more worried that "the US government will not regulate artificial intelligence enough," as opposed to just 21% who feared too much regulation. While Democrats and independents were somewhat more concerned about underregulation at 71%, Republicans largely shared those fears, with 62% saying they feared the government would not regulate AI enough.
The consensus was even stronger regarding Big Tech's power over AI policy, with 78% of respondents overall saying it had too much influence. This included 81% of Democrats and independents and 74% of Republicans.
With this in mind, many critics were puzzled by Jeffries' decision to stack his AI commission with some of the industry's top allies.
As Aaron Regunberg wrote in the New Republic last month, harnessing anger against the rapid, largely unregulated expansion of expensive, energy-sucking AI data centers was an essential part of Democrats' victories across the board in November's off-year elections:
In New Jersey, Gov.-elect Mikie Sherrill’s closing argument was a pledge to freeze electricity rates, which have soared because of data-center demand.
In Virginia, Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger won after pledging to make data centers “pay their own way,” and many Democrats went even further.
At least one candidate, John McAuliff, flipped a seat in the House of Delegates by focusing almost entirely on tying his Republican opponent to the “unchecked growth” of data centers, with an ad that asked, “Do you want more of these in your backyard?”
And in Georgia, Democrats won their first nonfederal statewide races in decades, earning 60% of the vote against two Republican members of the Public Service Commission by criticizing Big Tech “sweetheart deals” and campaigning for policies “to ensure that the communities that they’re extracting from” don’t end up with their “water supplies … tapped out or their energy … maxed out.”
"This is the most populist moment of voter rage I've ever seen, and the leading Democrats are absolutely hostile to the idea of doing anything to address Silicon Valley's massive power," said Matt Stoller, an anti-monopoly expert.
"Anticorruption is one of the strongest arguments with the broadest appeal in American politics right now, but the Democratic leadership simply refuses to stop tanking it," added Matt Duss, a former advisor to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
"I have never seen a gulf this wide between Democratic leadership and the party writ large," said author Zachary D. Carter. "The top is corrupt, the base is raging against corruption."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
At a time when the American public, and especially Democratic voters, express overwhelming distrust of artificial intelligence and Big Tech, the top House Democrat is being accused of failing to meet the moment.
On Tuesday, in preparation for an executive order to be signed this week by President Donald Trump, which would seek to block states from implementing new AI regulations, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) unveiled his own effort to cozy up to the industry, whose major players have set aside more than $200 million to push out anti-AI politicians during the 2026 midterms, according to the New York Times.
Jeffries announced the creation of a “House Democratic Commission on AI and the Innovation Economy,” which will “develop policy expertise in partnership with the innovation community, relevant stakeholders, and committees of jurisdiction.”
What immediately caught the eye of critics was the list of fellow Democrats Jeffries picked to serve on the commission. It will be co-chaired by Reps. Ted Lieu (Calif.), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), and Valerie Foushee (NC), with Reps. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.) and Frank Pallone (NJ) serving as ex officio co-chairs.
As Sludge reported Tuesday: "The panel’s leaders rank among the House Democrats with the deepest ties to Big Tech and AI, from holding millions of dollars in tech stock to the contributions they’ve raised for their campaigns and the Republican-backed deregulation bills they've signed onto."
In July, Gottheimer introduced a bill along with Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) "that would require financial regulators to create 'AI Innovation Labs' where firms could experiment with AI-driven financial products under looser regulations and without the normal threats of enforcement actions."
Gottheimer is also a major stakeholder in Microsoft, which has invested tens of millions of dollars into AI and nearly $7.5 million on lobbying in 2025 so far. Beyond the almost $100,000 in contributions Gottheimer has received from Microsoft, he is also a former executive who received anywhere from $1 million to $5 million last year from his stock holdings in the company, according to financial disclosure forms. He also frequently trades in other AI power players like Amazon, Meta, and Dell.
Lofgren, meanwhile, has accepted more money from the Internet industry over the course of her career than all but one other current House Democrat—including $265,000 from Google, $115,000 from Apple, and $110,000 from Meta, according to data from OpenSecrets.
In September 2024, Lofgren co-sponsored a bill introduced by Rep. Jay Abernolte (R-Calif.) which "would create a federal 'center for AI advancement and reliability' that it would instruct to work closely with private companies and other stakeholders on developing 'voluntary best practices and technical standards for evaluating the reliability, robustness, resilience, security, and safety of artificial intelligence systems.'"
Foushee, a member of the corporate-backed New Democrat Coalition, rode to Congress in 2022 with more than $1 million from the Protect Our Future political action committee, which was backed by former FTX CEO and convicted fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried.
In response to Trump's industry-friendly "AI Action Plan" in July, Foushee and the New Democrats unveiled their own "Innovation Agenda," which called for federal tax credits to companies that "reskill" workers and perform private research and development as well as federal investments in apprenticeships and "labor market data modernization."
Jeffries has neglected to take a position on Trump's proposal to preempt state regulations. Last Monday, he told reporters, "That conversation hasn't been brought to the leadership level yet."
In his statement announcing the Democratic commission on Tuesday, Jeffries said, "It is important that American companies continue to thrive" in the arena of AI, while "at the same time, Congress must consider what policies are needed to prevent bad actors from exploiting this transformative technology and inflicting harm upon the American people." However, he did not specifically mention Trump's pending block on state regulations.
A poll released Friday by the progressive group Demand Progress showed that Americans across the political spectrum are unsettled by AI's influence in Washington: 68% of respondents overall said they were more worried that "the US government will not regulate artificial intelligence enough," as opposed to just 21% who feared too much regulation. While Democrats and independents were somewhat more concerned about underregulation at 71%, Republicans largely shared those fears, with 62% saying they feared the government would not regulate AI enough.
The consensus was even stronger regarding Big Tech's power over AI policy, with 78% of respondents overall saying it had too much influence. This included 81% of Democrats and independents and 74% of Republicans.
With this in mind, many critics were puzzled by Jeffries' decision to stack his AI commission with some of the industry's top allies.
As Aaron Regunberg wrote in the New Republic last month, harnessing anger against the rapid, largely unregulated expansion of expensive, energy-sucking AI data centers was an essential part of Democrats' victories across the board in November's off-year elections:
In New Jersey, Gov.-elect Mikie Sherrill’s closing argument was a pledge to freeze electricity rates, which have soared because of data-center demand.
In Virginia, Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger won after pledging to make data centers “pay their own way,” and many Democrats went even further.
At least one candidate, John McAuliff, flipped a seat in the House of Delegates by focusing almost entirely on tying his Republican opponent to the “unchecked growth” of data centers, with an ad that asked, “Do you want more of these in your backyard?”
And in Georgia, Democrats won their first nonfederal statewide races in decades, earning 60% of the vote against two Republican members of the Public Service Commission by criticizing Big Tech “sweetheart deals” and campaigning for policies “to ensure that the communities that they’re extracting from” don’t end up with their “water supplies … tapped out or their energy … maxed out.”
"This is the most populist moment of voter rage I've ever seen, and the leading Democrats are absolutely hostile to the idea of doing anything to address Silicon Valley's massive power," said Matt Stoller, an anti-monopoly expert.
"Anticorruption is one of the strongest arguments with the broadest appeal in American politics right now, but the Democratic leadership simply refuses to stop tanking it," added Matt Duss, a former advisor to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
"I have never seen a gulf this wide between Democratic leadership and the party writ large," said author Zachary D. Carter. "The top is corrupt, the base is raging against corruption."
At a time when the American public, and especially Democratic voters, express overwhelming distrust of artificial intelligence and Big Tech, the top House Democrat is being accused of failing to meet the moment.
On Tuesday, in preparation for an executive order to be signed this week by President Donald Trump, which would seek to block states from implementing new AI regulations, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) unveiled his own effort to cozy up to the industry, whose major players have set aside more than $200 million to push out anti-AI politicians during the 2026 midterms, according to the New York Times.
Jeffries announced the creation of a “House Democratic Commission on AI and the Innovation Economy,” which will “develop policy expertise in partnership with the innovation community, relevant stakeholders, and committees of jurisdiction.”
What immediately caught the eye of critics was the list of fellow Democrats Jeffries picked to serve on the commission. It will be co-chaired by Reps. Ted Lieu (Calif.), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), and Valerie Foushee (NC), with Reps. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.) and Frank Pallone (NJ) serving as ex officio co-chairs.
As Sludge reported Tuesday: "The panel’s leaders rank among the House Democrats with the deepest ties to Big Tech and AI, from holding millions of dollars in tech stock to the contributions they’ve raised for their campaigns and the Republican-backed deregulation bills they've signed onto."
In July, Gottheimer introduced a bill along with Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) "that would require financial regulators to create 'AI Innovation Labs' where firms could experiment with AI-driven financial products under looser regulations and without the normal threats of enforcement actions."
Gottheimer is also a major stakeholder in Microsoft, which has invested tens of millions of dollars into AI and nearly $7.5 million on lobbying in 2025 so far. Beyond the almost $100,000 in contributions Gottheimer has received from Microsoft, he is also a former executive who received anywhere from $1 million to $5 million last year from his stock holdings in the company, according to financial disclosure forms. He also frequently trades in other AI power players like Amazon, Meta, and Dell.
Lofgren, meanwhile, has accepted more money from the Internet industry over the course of her career than all but one other current House Democrat—including $265,000 from Google, $115,000 from Apple, and $110,000 from Meta, according to data from OpenSecrets.
In September 2024, Lofgren co-sponsored a bill introduced by Rep. Jay Abernolte (R-Calif.) which "would create a federal 'center for AI advancement and reliability' that it would instruct to work closely with private companies and other stakeholders on developing 'voluntary best practices and technical standards for evaluating the reliability, robustness, resilience, security, and safety of artificial intelligence systems.'"
Foushee, a member of the corporate-backed New Democrat Coalition, rode to Congress in 2022 with more than $1 million from the Protect Our Future political action committee, which was backed by former FTX CEO and convicted fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried.
In response to Trump's industry-friendly "AI Action Plan" in July, Foushee and the New Democrats unveiled their own "Innovation Agenda," which called for federal tax credits to companies that "reskill" workers and perform private research and development as well as federal investments in apprenticeships and "labor market data modernization."
Jeffries has neglected to take a position on Trump's proposal to preempt state regulations. Last Monday, he told reporters, "That conversation hasn't been brought to the leadership level yet."
In his statement announcing the Democratic commission on Tuesday, Jeffries said, "It is important that American companies continue to thrive" in the arena of AI, while "at the same time, Congress must consider what policies are needed to prevent bad actors from exploiting this transformative technology and inflicting harm upon the American people." However, he did not specifically mention Trump's pending block on state regulations.
A poll released Friday by the progressive group Demand Progress showed that Americans across the political spectrum are unsettled by AI's influence in Washington: 68% of respondents overall said they were more worried that "the US government will not regulate artificial intelligence enough," as opposed to just 21% who feared too much regulation. While Democrats and independents were somewhat more concerned about underregulation at 71%, Republicans largely shared those fears, with 62% saying they feared the government would not regulate AI enough.
The consensus was even stronger regarding Big Tech's power over AI policy, with 78% of respondents overall saying it had too much influence. This included 81% of Democrats and independents and 74% of Republicans.
With this in mind, many critics were puzzled by Jeffries' decision to stack his AI commission with some of the industry's top allies.
As Aaron Regunberg wrote in the New Republic last month, harnessing anger against the rapid, largely unregulated expansion of expensive, energy-sucking AI data centers was an essential part of Democrats' victories across the board in November's off-year elections:
In New Jersey, Gov.-elect Mikie Sherrill’s closing argument was a pledge to freeze electricity rates, which have soared because of data-center demand.
In Virginia, Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger won after pledging to make data centers “pay their own way,” and many Democrats went even further.
At least one candidate, John McAuliff, flipped a seat in the House of Delegates by focusing almost entirely on tying his Republican opponent to the “unchecked growth” of data centers, with an ad that asked, “Do you want more of these in your backyard?”
And in Georgia, Democrats won their first nonfederal statewide races in decades, earning 60% of the vote against two Republican members of the Public Service Commission by criticizing Big Tech “sweetheart deals” and campaigning for policies “to ensure that the communities that they’re extracting from” don’t end up with their “water supplies … tapped out or their energy … maxed out.”
"This is the most populist moment of voter rage I've ever seen, and the leading Democrats are absolutely hostile to the idea of doing anything to address Silicon Valley's massive power," said Matt Stoller, an anti-monopoly expert.
"Anticorruption is one of the strongest arguments with the broadest appeal in American politics right now, but the Democratic leadership simply refuses to stop tanking it," added Matt Duss, a former advisor to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
"I have never seen a gulf this wide between Democratic leadership and the party writ large," said author Zachary D. Carter. "The top is corrupt, the base is raging against corruption."