Democrats Hesitate as Sanders Presses for a Halt to A.I. Development

WASHINGTON — As public anxiety over artificial intelligence grows, Democratic politicians who may seek the White House in 2028 are increasingly confronting a political problem: how to criticize the technology’s costs and risks without embracing the sweeping restrictions proposed by Senator Bernie Sanders.

Mr. Sanders, an independent from Vermont who has long challenged the influence of large corporations, has called for a halt to the development of artificial intelligence, urging the executives of leading technology companies to “stop building machines that humans cannot control.”

Axios asked nearly 20 Democrats considered potential presidential contenders whether they supported Mr. Sanders’s proposal. Only one directly answered the question.

The reluctance reflects a broader uncertainty within the Democratic Party about how aggressively to confront an industry that has become central to the American economy and to the competition with China, even as concerns about job losses, electricity prices, energy consumption and the risks posed by increasingly capable A.I. systems grow.

The political stakes are rising.

Democratic strategists worry that the party could be caught unprepared in 2028 if voters turn their frustration with artificial intelligence infrastructure into a broader political movement. At the same time, Republicans who once enthusiastically promoted A.I. companies and the construction of the data centers needed to power them have begun repositioning themselves as skeptics.

The issue is particularly acute around data centers, enormous facilities that consume vast quantities of electricity and water. Communities across the country have increasingly questioned whether the economic benefits justify the infrastructure demands and higher utility costs.

When asked whether they supported Mr. Sanders’s call to halt A.I. development, none of the potential Democratic candidates embraced the proposal. Yet almost none directly criticized his position, either.

The most pointed response came from Rahm Emanuel, the former mayor of Chicago, who is viewed as a possible 2028 contender.

“This is talking around a problem instead of trying to solve it. A pause is fine — but then what?”

Mr. Emanuel said the purpose of a pause should be to develop a broader strategy rather than simply delay construction.

“The real question,” Emanuel said, “is how the time it buys gets used to build a comprehensive plan that meets America’s energy needs instead of masking them.”

He has called for changes to the permitting process and for major technology companies, known as hyperscalers, to finance upgrades to the energy infrastructure required to support their facilities.

About half of the potential Democratic contenders contacted by Axios did not respond, including former Vice President Kamala Harris, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.

Only two potential Democratic presidential candidates, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Representative Ro Khanna of California, have expressed support for some form of a data-center pause.

A Democratic Opening

For Democratic strategists, the hesitation presents both a problem and an opportunity.

Adam Carlson, a progressive pollster, said Democrats had been too cautious about the issue.

“It’s a big strategic error for the Democratic Party writ large not to be the one that’s owning this,” he said.

He warned that Republicans could seize the issue before Democrats do.

“What if JD Vance comes out and is the first major presidential candidate to support a data center moratorium, other than AOC?” Carlson asked. “That’s a huge miss. And then everyone who comes out after is going to be seen as slow to the punch against JD Vance.”

The concern comes as candidates competing in this year’s midterm elections have moved faster than their potential presidential counterparts.

Republicans and Democrats running for office in states where data-center development has become controversial have increasingly endorsed temporary pauses or restrictions. A recent Fox News poll found that 70 percent of voters opposed construction of an A.I. data center in their community.

Mike Rogers, the Republican nominee for Senate in Michigan, has endorsed a one-year moratorium on new data centers. Amy Acton, the Democratic candidate for governor of Ohio, has called for a “conditional moratorium.” Stacy Garrity, the Republican nominee for governor of Pennsylvania, supports a “pause.”

The positions reflect a rapid change in the politics of an industry that only recently enjoyed broad bipartisan enthusiasm.

From Embrace to Skepticism

Several Democratic governors and senators who have been reluctant to endorse a full moratorium have nevertheless adopted tougher rhetoric toward data centers.

In Pennsylvania, Gov. Josh Shapiro’s administration has criticized “irresponsible” data centers. In Illinois, Gov. JB Pritzker has revoked tax incentives for the facilities, reversing earlier positions.

A spokesman for Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona said there should be “no data centers in communities that don’t want them.”

The offices of Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland and Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey pointed to legislation they support that would require data centers to cover the costs of the energy infrastructure they require.

“Americans should not have to pay higher electric bills and other costs to subsidize the data centers being built by the richest corporations on the planet,” Van Hollen said.

Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, has also expressed skepticism about the direction of the industry.

His office pointed to a Substack essay about a recent trip to Silicon Valley, where Mr. Murphy wrote that he “could divine very few ‘American values’ (juxtaposed against ‘Chinese values’)” guiding the development of A.I.

“Any talk about ethical or moral AI is just whitewash,” Murphy’s post said.

The Progressive Challenge

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and Mr. Khanna have gone further than most of their Democratic colleagues, making opposition to data-center expansion a central part of their positions on A.I.

Mike Casca, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, said that AOC is “leading the data center moratorium bill in the House.” He declined to comment on Mr. Sanders’s proposal to halt A.I. development itself.

Mr. Khanna said he supported a pause on data-center construction in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — “places where these centers have been shoved down the throats of communities.”

His position represents a shift from his earlier stance.

Mr. Khanna did not directly address Mr. Sanders’s proposal for a broader halt to A.I. development. He said he had recently discussed artificial intelligence with Pope Leo and believed the technology “must be developed in accordance with the principles” of the pope’s first encyclical on the subject.

Mr. Carlson suggested that some potential presidential candidates might simply be waiting.

The Nov. 3 midterm elections could provide a clearer indication of whether opposition to data centers has become a durable political force before candidates begin defining their positions for the 2028 presidential campaign.

Republicans Face Their Own Reversal

The political unease extends beyond Democrats.

Until recently, many Republicans and Democrats defended data-center construction as an economic opportunity. The facilities bring tax revenue to local governments, create construction jobs and provide work for organized labor.

The logic was straightforward: If the technology was going to be developed anyway, politicians reasoned, their communities should benefit from the investment.

But opposition has grown strong enough that some Republicans are reconsidering their earlier enthusiasm.

That creates an uncomfortable political dynamic for the party because President Trump and his administration have been among the most prominent advocates of artificial intelligence and the infrastructure required to expand it.

For Democrats, meanwhile, the challenge is to distinguish themselves without appearing hostile to technological innovation or American competitiveness.

Sanders Was Early

Mr. Sanders’s proposal may still sound unusually sweeping, but his record on A.I. suggests that some of his positions can move from the political margins toward the mainstream.

He was the first member of Congress to endorse a data-center moratorium late last year. At the time, most Democrats questioned about the proposal rejected it.

The political landscape has since changed.

Candidates from both parties running in the 2026 elections are now advocating state-level pauses on data-center construction. New York has enacted a one-year moratorium on hyperscaler data centers.

And even within the technology industry, there have been signs of caution. OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman announced last week that the company had temporarily paused some technological training.

The question confronting Democrats now is not simply whether artificial intelligence should be embraced or resisted. It is whether the party can develop a political language for governing a technology that is rapidly changing the economy before voters, Republicans or events force the issue for them.

For Mr. Sanders, that debate has already begun. For many of the Democrats who may seek the presidency in 2028, the harder question is how long they can avoid taking a side.