U.S. lawmakers, Hill staffers and Washington insiders from both parties are increasingly frustrated with leaders of AI companies who frame public discussion around digital sentience and existential catastrophe. Sources close to the White House and Congress say they would prefer that company chiefs focus on building products safely rather than driving political debate.
Why it matters
Officials and lawmakers worry that the industry’s apocalyptic rhetoric is turning an already complex regulatory debate into moral panic. Instead of persuading Americans about AI’s potential benefits and shared prosperity — messages that could ease regulation — executives often alternate between promising prosperity and warning of doom, sometimes in the same appearance.
Current state
Sources told Axios that the oscillation between positive and catastrophic messages creates political whiplash, fueling public backlash and making regulation harder. Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah) said, "It's obvious that they're tripping over their own shoelaces in trying to sell the value of this to the public. It's very hard to imagine a group right now that operates more in a vacuum, more out of touch with everyday Americans, than the AI industry."
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) told Axios: "CEOs like Sam Altman are saying the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology. You cannot trust billionaires to make decisions to keep us safe." Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) criticized Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei in a letter this month for what he described as "panic-inducing commentary," saying such remarks "wreak havoc on the public discourse."
Political alignments and risks
Democrats have also noticed how closely some tech and AI leaders have cozied up to former President Donald Trump; several Democrats see an opportunity to turn those ties into political points. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said, "The American people hate that Donald Trump is cozying up to tech billionaires, while AI threatens our jobs and livelihoods. Democrats need to make the AI industry's political money an issue, data centers an issue, and go on offense to protect workers and kids."
Specific flashpoints: Anthropic and OpenAI
Administration officials are particularly displeased with Anthropic for two reasons. First, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei attended a late-September gathering with Donald Trump but did not disclose safety incidents involving Anthropic models that affected government websites. According to the reporting, U.S. officials were informed on Thursday, Oct. 8, and the company published a Friday evening blog post about the incidents — a sequencing one official described as "hiding the ball." (The reporting gives the timing as late September for the meeting and indicates notification to U.S. officials on Oct. 8, with a blog post the following evening.)
Second, Anthropic introduced language in an AI safety bill that included federal preemption of state AI laws — a provision the company had broadly opposed previously — and defined a catastrophic AI incident as causing 50 or more deaths. That death-based threshold drew backlash, and Anthropic's Head of Public Affairs later walked back portions of the bill, increasing distrust in Washington.
Anthropic says it briefed the White House and affected agencies after its reviews were complete, and that it is working with the Super Intelligence Force as it develops an incident reporting process.
Incident reporting and regulation
The industry is seeking clearer rules on incident reporting, and several AI companies told officials they do not find the administration's process straightforward. Death-based definitions of AI catastrophe have appeared in some landmark state regulations, such as those in California, according to reporting.
Washington's concerns extend to OpenAI as well. Both Anthropic and OpenAI are targets of a developing Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation. OpenAI’s legislative strategy has raised eyebrows on the Hill and in state legislatures: New York State assemblymember Alex Bores criticized a blog post from Chris Lehane, OpenAI’s chief lobbyist, saying OpenAI’s policy proposals were vague and that the company ultimately wants to block state regulation.
OpenAI said it has engaged with both parties, the administration and statehouses across the country and is "talking with people around the country" about the benefits of AI.
Reality check and bottom line
So far, industry outreach has not won broad public support: a recent poll showed a majority of Americans view AI as harmful to society. The takeaway for AI CEOs, according to sources cited by Axios, is increasingly simple: do less public political messaging and focus on safe product development.
Reporting contribution: Stef W. Kight.
