Dan Osborn, an independent candidate for the US Senate in Nebraska, found common ground with a self-described hardcore MAGA supporter by discussing artificial intelligence and data centers. The two men agreed immediately on the need for regulation, despite their usual political differences.
The AI Pact
Osborn is one of more than 15 politicians across the country who have joined the AI Pact. This agreement contains five promises focused on regulating data centres and artificial intelligence itself. Concerns about these facilities have grown rapidly during the midterm election cycle. Voters worry about environmental damage, the secrecy surrounding construction, and the corporate power driving the industry.
The website for the initiative states it aims to provide a baseline for a humanity-first future. The pact grew out of the Political Integrity Project, an organisation that opposes money in politics. Daniel Lobo-Lewis, a founder of that group, helped draft the five promises. These include mandatory safety reviews for AI models, an AI dividend for workers, and the right for consumers and companies to sue over harms caused by models.
Lobo-Lewis says the group networked with AI safety organisations and political bodies to create the pledge. Funding comes from a progressive political action committee. He states that no AI safety groups or tech companies provide direct funding.
Currently, every signer except Osborn is a Democrat. Lobo-Lewis says the group would welcome Republicans. Some signers have built their campaigns on opposing data centres and big technology firms. Representative Justin Pearson, a Democrat from Tennessee, gained national attention by challenging pollution from SpaceX facilities. Will Lawrence, a left-wing candidate who won a competitive primary in Michigan, operates in a district with strong opposition to data centre development.
Regulation over bans
The pledge does not demand an immediate halt to data centre construction. Instead, it supports policies that ban tax breaks, backroom deals, and excessive energy usage for these facilities. Lobo-Lewis says this measured language is intentional. It acts as a floor for candidates to sign, particularly those with strong ties to labour unions. Several unions have recently reaffirmed their support for data centre construction.
Alexander McCoy, a progressive strategist working on AI issues, notes that candidates in swing seats focus on affordability, job creation, and lowering costs. Some do not want to rule out the possibility that a data centre project could help with those goals. At the same time, AI is expected to be disruptive unless guardrails exist. McCoy asks if it is worth creating construction jobs now at the cost of destroying opportunities for other workers in the district.
Osborn, a Navy veteran and labour leader, says data centres can provide infrastructure and jobs. He campaigns in rural areas where farmers worry about losing land to development. He believes Congress must regulate data centres.
Osborn says getting this right is essential. He adds that calling a time-out right now does not seem like a bad idea.
Political shifts
Osborn’s position is becoming common across the political spectrum. Governors who previously supported data centre development, such as Pennsylvania Democrat Josh Shapiro and Texas Republican Greg Abbott, have taken steps to assure voters they are regulating the industry. Abbott recently initiated a temporary moratorium on construction in his state after stating that data centres have dug their own grave in Texas.
Other promises in the AI Pact mirror positions leaders of both parties have recently considered. The White House is developing a voluntary safety review for AI models. Donald Trump has met with AI executives regarding a worker dividend for AI profits, an idea reportedly pitched to him by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. The Trump administration has encouraged AI companies, governors, and utilities to sign a voluntary pledge protecting ratepayers from electricity increases due to data centres.
Lobo-Lewis says the pact offers assurances for much stronger protections. He dismisses the White House’s actions as lip service. He states he cannot imagine the Trump administration wanting mandatory safety reviews or nationwide tax breaks for data centre construction. Abbott’s opponent in the Texas gubernatorial race, state representative Gina Hinojosa, is a signer of the pact. She has gone on the offensive against Abbott’s moratorium, claiming he is not doing enough to ensure people are protected.
“These data centres are supporting an AI industry that has no rules. It threatens our jobs, livelihood, health, safety, and well-being. As AI develops this fast, we need basic ground rules—we need laws to protect Texans. We should not be replacing teachers with AI. We should not be replacing nurses with AI,” Hinojosa tells WIRED.
Hinojosa adds that AI can be a useful tool but must be used responsibly. She argues there are currently no guardrails to ensure this.
Public perception
The pledge arrives as the political class debates whether voters’ worries about data centres are linked to their concerns about AI. Some question how closely data centre opposition connects to worries about artificial intelligence. Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed support for data centre construction. He recently stated that if he were a mayor or governor with a chance to get a big plant or data centre, he would absolutely want it.
In March, Senator Bernie Sanders became one of the first politicians to link AI safety measures to data centres. He proposed a national moratorium on construction until Congress passes legislation safeguarding the public from the dangers of artificial intelligence. A small but growing number of politicians have since followed suit, increasingly tying data centre development to larger concerns about AI.
Earlier this week, Texas attorney general Ken Paxton released a data centre plan while running for Senate. The plan included making data centres legally liable for chatbots that undermine children’s safety. Some polling suggests environmental worries about data centres still far outrank AI concerns among the public.
For Osborn, the idea that voters are not connecting the dots between data centres and the negatives of big technology is something incubated solely in Washington, DC. He believes people like to pretend they are all stupid.
