AI has hit the campaign trail, with candidates in both parties casting it as a fight over jobs and corporate power.

Why it matters: AI is emerging as a stand-in for kitchen-table concerns like paychecks, power bills and the future of the economy.

• Democrats and Republicans at the state level are testing whether anti-Big Tech messaging can compete with an industry pouring billions into AI infrastructure and political influence.

Driving the news: Several Democrats this cycle are echoing Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and his critique of concentrated tech power.

• Some Republicans are adopting their own version, focusing on workforce disruption, energy costs and anger over tech companies.

Between the lines: The rhetoric may differ, but the emerging populist AI playbook has the same target: Big Tech.

In Michigan, Republican Tom Leonard is calling for a one-year moratorium on data center construction in his bid for governor.

• "There is no doubt that AI in the months and in the years ahead is going to create issues for people finding jobs, and frankly, taxpayers should never be subsidizing that. So I say it starts with cutting off the corporate welfare," Leonard, a former Michigan House Speaker, told Axios.
• Other Republicans from Oklahoma to Maryland are also calling to pause new data center construction.

Democrats taking a strong stance on pausing new data center development are also skeptical of AI companies' claims they're acting in the public interest.

• Democratic New York state Sen. Kristen Gonzalez, who is part of a multistate working group on tech legislation, said that Anthropic's recent commitment to pay for its data center needs "isn't a clear win for consumers."
• "We believe this is an important step and that we have more to do to ensure our data centers benefit nearby communities," an Anthropic spokesperson said in a statement.

Georgia state Rep. Ruwa Romman, who's running for governor, said that "Anthropic is not advocating for the people. Anthropic is advocating for itself, just like every corporation that has been using our campaign finance laws to have their way."

• "I would very much like to see more data about how it's good for consumers," Romman added. "At the end of the day, AI is displacing jobs and causing psychosis and mental health challenges in people."

Friction point: Candidates face pressure from super PAC money on one side and grassroots organizing on the other.

• Calls from constituents to Hill offices in both parties asking about data center impacts are pouring in, one industry source said, describing it as "ubiquitous."
• None of the PACs, even the Anthropic-backed ones positioning themselves as consumer-friendly, are aligned with these populist candidates as of now.

How it works: Data center fights are happening at the local level where county and city governments control whether shovels hit the ground or permits get approved.

• State-level lawmakers have a better shot at pausing project approvals than candidates gunning for federal office.

The big picture: Sanders, who took his populist message to California this week alongside presidential hopeful Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), wants politicians to think bigger.

• "What I am looking at right now goes beyond electric rates," Sanders said in a call with reporters ahead of his trip. "It goes to who will essentially control this transformative technology."
• "Will it simply be Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos and other multibillionaires who make huge amounts of money off of this, or will AI and robotics work to improve life for human beings?"

As the Pentagon and Anthropic wage an ugly and potentially costly battle, three other leading AI labs are also negotiating with the department and deliberating internally about the terms under which they'll let the military use their models.

Why it matters: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wants to integrate AI into everything the military does more quickly and effectively than adversaries like China. He's insisting AI firms give unrestricted access to their models with no questions asked — and showing he's willing to play hardball to force their hands.

Driving the news: The Pentagon is threatening to sever its contract with Anthropic and declare the company a "supply chain risk" because it's unwilling to lift certain restrictions on its model, Claude.

• The company is particularly concerned about Claude being used for mass domestic surveillance or to develop fully autonomous weapons.
• The use of Claude in the Nicolás Maduro raid deepened tensions. The Pentagon claims an Anthropic executive raised concerns after the operation, though Anthropic denies that.
• Administration officials say it's unworkable for the military to have to litigate individual use cases with Anthropic before or after the fact. "We're dead serious," a senior Pentagon official told Axios of the threat to cut off Anthropic and force its vendors to follow suit.

State of play: Claude is the only model available in the military's classified systems through Anthropic's partnership with Palantir.

• Three other models — OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini and xAI's Grok — are available in unclassified systems, and have lifted their ordinary safeguards as part of those agreements.
• Negotiations to bring those companies into the classified domain are now more urgent as the Pentagon ponders how to replace Claude if necessary — a process a senior official conceded would be massively disruptive.

Keep reading.

Here's our guide to catch you up on the AI policy news you may have missed this week:

💰 Super PAC spending: Jobs and Democracy PAC — the Democratic arm of Anthropic-backed AI transparency and safeguards group Public First Action — yesterday launched a $450,000 ad campaign in support of Alex Bores.

• Bores, the Democratic New York assembly member running for Congress, is a target of pro-AI super PACs and recently released an AI policy platform.

🚨 Utah bill clash: The White House is pressuring a Utah Republican state legislator to abandon AI transparency and kids' safety legislation, Maria reported earlier this week.

• It's a sign that the Trump administration is now starting to intervene with the states in its efforts to squash AI regulation.

📑 AI regs review: House Science Chair Brian Babin (R-Texas) and Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) sent a letter asking that the Government Accountability Office "examine the current laws and regulations governing AI at both the federal and state levels" to help guide future legislation.

🇺🇸 America's AI pitch: White House Office of Science and Technology Policy director Michael Kratsios told the AI Impact Summit in India today that the U.S. "totally" rejects global governance of AI, according to a transcript.

• "We believe AI adoption cannot lead to a brighter future if it is subject to bureaucracies and centralized control," he said in his speech.
• "Ideological, risk-focused obsessions, such as climate or equity, become excuses for bureaucratic management and centralization," he said.
• Kratsios also pitched the White House's new AI exports program to attendees, saying that the U.S. "and the rest of the world can only fully realize the amazing potential of this technology when we share an open, cooperative AI ecosystem built on top of localized, sovereign infrastructure."

🇪🇺 Europe's AI pitch: French President Emmanuel Macron told the summit earlier this week that Europe is not only "determined to continue to shape the rules of the game" on AI with allies, but is a "safe space" for innovation and investment, per France24.

• "Europe is not blindly focused on regulation," he said.