Washington's next big debate: what to do about jobs AI eliminates
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei. Photo: Ralph Alswang for Axios
Axios' 2025 AI+ DC Summit mapped a stark divide in approaches to handling a predicted tidal wave of jobs disrupted or eliminated by AI.
Why it matters: Whether and how to help workers navigate a job market reshaped by AI will be one of the most consequential choices the U.S. government makes in the next few years.
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei revisited his prediction of a potential white-collar bloodbath from AI in an interview with Axios CEO Jim VandeHei that kicked off the event.
- That outcome isn't certain, Amodei said — "When an exponential is moving very quickly, you can't be sure. ... I think it is likely enough to happen that we felt there was a need to warn the world about it and to speak honestly."
- Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, who oversees the company's policy operation, added, "You need some kind of policy response at the scale of disruption we expect in the next five years."
As AI's displacement of human jobs continues to accelerate, Amodei said, a public-sector fix may be in order.
- "I suspect at the end of this that the government is going to need to step in, especially during a period of transition, and provide for people," Amodei said.
- "One thing I've suggested is, maybe you might want to tax the AI companies."
Yes, but: At the summit's conclusion, White House economic adviser Jacob Helberg argued for leaving more of the business of job-market adaptation to private industry.
- "The notion that the government necessarily has to hold the hands of every single person getting displaced, you know, underestimates the resourcefulness of people," Helberg said in an interview with Axios' Maria Curi.
- "The top-down approach, where we assume that the government has to have the answer to everything, actually underestimates the incredible adaptability and resourcefulness of the private sector."
Between these two poles, legislators, executives and policymakers offered a variety of alternative ideas for protecting workers in an era of disruption.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), in an interview with Axios' Ashley Gold, suggested the U.S. might need a sort of public employment agency.
- "I believe we need a future workforce administration to hire from schools across the country ... an AI Academy. ... It needs to be a government agency, putting them to work for a few years so their skills don't atrophy."
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) offers a different approach as part of a larger "AI for America" plan he unveiled Wednesday that involves establishing a public "trust fund" paid for by tech companies.
- "There is a possibility we could have millions of people put out of work by artificial intelligence. Hey, AI companies need customers. You're not going to have customers if people don't have jobs," Kelly said in an interview with Axios' Ina Fried.
- Upskilling and retraining workers is the "biggest thing" that lawmakers should work on now, and that effort "also benefits AI companies," he said.
- Kelly's proposal outlines several possible ways tech companies might contribute to such a fund: by paying more for their use of public resources (like power, water and land), through additional taxes on profits from digital ad tools powered by AI; or from new taxes on "AI-based revenue windfalls."
The bottom line: This debate is just getting started — and is sure to play a role in both the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 White House race.
