Every major technology that changed life raised the same question: who gets to be in charge? With railroads it was industrialists versus regulator, with broadcasting it was networks versus the FCC, with the internet it was platforms versus themselves because regulation never really happened. Now artificial intelligence is raising that question again. The stakes may be higher than before.
AI is not a faster search engine or a smarter phone feature. It is like a foundation. The kind that will decide how Americans find work, get healthcare, access credit, consume information and interact with government services. Right now, it’s unclear who shapes that foundation, who profits from it and who is protected from its failures.
Big Techs Commanding Lead
The truth is that a small number of companies have more influence over AIs development and deployment than any government body or public institution. Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Meta and OpenAI control the computing infrastructure, models, distribution channels and research talent that define what AI can do. How it reaches the world.
This concentration happened because of money. Training AI models costs hundreds of millions of dollars. Maintaining the cloud infrastructure required to run them costs billions. Those numbers are too high for startups, universities or government agencies.
The consequence is that decisions have societal implications. Like how AI hiring tools are designed, are being made inside corporate boardrooms with no public input and limited regulatory oversight. Efficiency and shareholder return are the goals. Public accountability is not a priority.
A Government Running to Catch Up
Washington has not ignored the conversation. The Biden administration issued an order on AI safety in late 2023 establishing guidelines around transparency, bias testing and national security applications. Several federal agencies have signalled that existing consumer protection and civil rights laws apply to AI systems.
Federal legislation. The kind that sets clear enforceable nationwide standards. Has not materialized. Congress is divided on how to regulate an industry that is both a source of American economic competitiveness and a vector for harm. Tech industry lobbying has been aggressive. The technical complexity of the subject gives lawmakers an excuse to defer.
The result is a patchwork. Some Americans are protected by state laws that otherers not. Some AI applications face scrutiny while others operate in a vacuum.
Where the American People Fit In
The striking feature of this debate is how little ordinary Americans have been included. Public polling shows that most people want AI oversight, greater transparency and clear legal recourse when AI decisions cause harm. Those preferences have had little influence on policy.
This isn’t surprising. AI governance is complex, moves fast and lacks urgency. The absence of public participation has real costs. Communities most likely to be harmed by AI systems are often the least represented in AI policy discussions.
Civil society organizations, researchers and journalists have worked to fill that gap surfacing cases of harm and pushing for accountability. Their impact has been limited.
The Question That Can’t Wait
Technology doesn’t pause while governance catches up. Every month that passes without rules is a month in which AI systems embed themselves more deeply into American institutions. The battle over who controls AI is not abstract. It will decide whether this technology expands opportunity or concentrates it.
That outcome isn’t fixed. It won’t be determined by the technology itself. It will be determined by who shows up to fight for it.
