🟢 Green
Candidate understands the problem with AI, has actionable solutions, and signals they are centering the public interest.
AI and the 2026 U.S. Midterms: A Voter Guide
Are your candidates up to the challenges AI poses? This guide offers five simple questions to ask a candidate about AI, along with tips on how to assess their answers before you vote in November.
Tips for Talking to Candidates and Prioritizing AI Issues
This year, AI has been appearing everywhere. The technology is being integrated into cell phones, cars, kid’s toys, medical devices, and drive-thru windows. Employers are demanding you adopt AI in the workplace. Teens are using chatbots at surging rates. AI data centers are being built in your backyard. AI-related stocks are dominating the stock market and your 401k. Headlines are warning of massive AI-driven job loss. And, AI companies promise, this upheaval is just the beginning.
The 2026 midterms are a real opportunity to elect politicians who will turn the tide on AI — putting guardrails on the technology, holding tech companies accountable for what they build, and making sure local communities are considered in the age of AI.
A Primer on AI Policy in the United States:
-
AI regulation is being pushed forward at the state level — but it’s facing ongoing hurdles. Many states have put forth their own efforts to regulate AI and incentivize safer AI products. In fact, well over 1,000 bills have been introduced across different states. And that number keeps growing. While there is some momentum at the federal level, these efforts are being stalled by disagreement over how to specifically address this new technology. Regulation is also hindered by intensive lobbying and campaign contributions from the AI industry, which is pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into fighting regulatory efforts — just like the tobacco industry has done for decades.
-
Major AI companies are being sued for harms. Lawsuits have been filed against OpenAI, Google, and Character.AI after kids and adults were harmed by AI chatbots. The tragic facts of these cases demonstrate the ways in which AI companies have designed their products in dangerously manipulative ways, and deprioritized safety before releasing their products (like ChatGPT and Gemini) to the public.
-
AI backlash is shifting political sentiment. From students booing graduation speeches that mention AI, to outcry over AI-generated art and AI-related layoffs, the public has begun voicing strong negative opinions on the trajectory of AI in America. As a result, some politicians that held a warmer, more optimistic stance on AI in 2024 and 2025 have begun to adjust their messaging — and their policy proposals — as the tides turn against AI’s rollout.
How to Use This Guide
This guide offers five simple questions you can ask a candidate about AI, along with a rough sketch of how a candidate may reply. We’ve broken the potential replies down into three categories:
🟡 Yellow
Candidate is broadly aware of the problem with AI, but may not have a grasp on solutions.
🔴 Red
Candidate dismisses problems around AI and may be catering to AI industry narratives.
Using this green-yellow-red system, you’ll be able to better understand a candidate’s views on AI before you vote. It should be noted that a candidate’s perspective on AI may be shaped by which kind of election they’re running in — for example, a mayoral candidate may have a decent grasp of local AI impacts, but be less informed about federal regulation efforts compared to a senate candidate.
Regardless of which election a candidate is running in, the fundamentals remain the same — the public needs politicians who will prioritize and protect the well-being of people as technology is rolled out in society. By using your voice at the ballot box this November, you can be a part of this important moment with AI.
Here are the top five AI issues in the midterm elections:
Communities across America are facing AI-related job loss, AI data center buildouts, and more. Many are not currently offered a meaningful seat at the table in these conversations or processes.
🟢 Green
- Believes that the costs/drawbacks of AI development should not be shouldered by local residents
- Believes that government and the AI industry should bear responsibility for workforce transition, funding mechanisms, etc. — not ordinary people and communities.
- Attuned to the tradeoffs involved with a data center being built; aware of the strain it may put on the community.
- Recognizes that communities deserve a meaningful seat at the table before decisions around AI are made.
- Has a plan for supporting those impacted by AI-related job loss, and/or a plan to help people keep or find new jobs in the face of AI.
🟡 Yellow
- Has awareness of how AI automation is already affecting local industries and employment.
- Shows general support for a workforce program for the age of AI, but lacks specific mechanisms or a fleshed-out plan.
🔴 Red
- Frames answers about AI in terms of “national competitiveness” or “innovation opportunity” — without meaningfully engaging with local-level consequences.
- Treats AI’s impacts on communities as a future concern.
- Reduces your question to one of “job creation opportunities,” and does not actually engage with the potential negative impacts.
AI is a new technology that is being integrated throughout society. But right now, it’s not being regulated in a meaningful way.
🟢 Green
- Firmly believes that AI should be regulated at the state and federal level.
- Strong working knowledge of today’s regulation efforts.
- Mentions clear federal or state standards for AI, independent oversight (instead of allowing companies to conduct all oversight on their own), and meaningful enforcement mechanisms, such as the application of product liability to AI.
🟡 Yellow
- Supports some regulation, but is vague on how it would be enforced.
- Mentions the importance of “innovation” and not wanting to slow AI development, but does acknowledge a need for regulation.
🔴 Red
- Avoids directly answering your question, while using vague language around “innovation” and not wanting to slow AI development.
- Suggests that the AI industry should self-regulate, and that government intervention would harm competition.
Job loss from AI is a threat to steady employment in America. It is unclear how workers — in the current workforce or the future workforce — will be supported.
🟢 Green
- Believes there are roles that should be reserved exclusively for people, not AI.
- Has a plan for how to support workers who may be displaced by AI, such as retraining pipelines.
- Mentions tax incentives that would encourage companies to retain human employees.
🟡 Yellow
- Can speak in specifics about the threats of AI job loss, but may not yet have a plan in place for how to support workers.
🔴 Red
- Avoids the topic entirely and/or uses vague language around “innovation” and not wanting to slow AI development.
- Does not believe the government should play a major role in supporting the current or future workforce’s opportunities.
- Believes market forces will naturally solve this issue.
From AI systems that fail small businesses, to AI chatbots that harm kids and adults, AI companies continue to roll out products that wreck havoc on the public — and then avoid accountability for those harms.
🟢 Green
- Has strong knowledge of today’s AI harms (deepfakes, AI-enabled fraud, chatbot harms, etc.), and is aware of high-profile lawsuits against AI companies.
- Says that companies need to be held “liable” for harms their products cause.
- Believes that AI developers should be held accountable for harms, not just the businesses and people using AI.
- Supports legislation that clarifies the duties AI companies hold to the public and their users, and ensures clear lines of liability.
🟡 Yellow
- Supports some broad liability for AI companies, but isn’t clear on scope or enforcement.
🔴 Red
- Avoids the topic and/or uses vague language around “innovation” and not wanting to slow AI development.
- Does not believe that AI companies are making “products,” and thus should not be subjected to “product liability” like other American industries.
- Argues that AI users are the ones assuming risk with AI products.
Kids and teens are quickly adopting AI chatbots for personal use. But these chatbots are proving to be dangerous for kids — especially given kids’ developmental needs — and are not designed with clear safety standards.
🟢 Green
- Has strong knowledge of chatbot harms, especially as they impact kids/teens.
- Is aware of high-profile lawsuits against AI companies, including OpenAI, Character.AI, and Google over chatbot harms.
- Shows awareness of how chatbot design is involved in chatbot harms (such as how chatbots are designed to type and speak like a human, cultivate emotional attachment, etc.)
- Supports most or all of the following: age verification; independent safety testing for young users; standards prohibiting harmful design features (human-like/stimulating intimacy/companionship); liability; data privacy protections including restrictions on behavioral data collection for kids; independent review before deployment in schools.
🟡 Yellow
- Acknowledges that kids and teens are uniquely vulnerable to AI.
- Conveys general concern on chatbot issues.
- Supports age verification with AI products.
- Supports parental tools built into AI products.
- Supports developing AI industry standards and best practices.
- Supports measures that would limit chatbot outputs.
🔴 Red
- Avoids the topic and/or uses vague language around “innovation” and not wanting to slow AI development.
- Downplays the role of AI companies and dangerous chatbot design in AI harms, placing responsibility on parents and young users.
- Suggests that existing laws are sufficient for protecting against chatbot harms.
- Treats this as a content-related issue, one that lawmakers are unable to touch due to Section 230.
Resources
For up to date tracking on AI policy movement in your state, visit transparencycoalition.ai/news/ai-legislation-tracker-map-2026
To see where your Congressional candidate stands on these issues, visit ontheballot.ai
To learn more about today’s AI issues and cutting-edge solutions, read our “AI Roadmap,” visit humanetech.com/ai-roadmap.
