Senator Elizabeth Warren
Senator Warren’s Office
On June 11 at a hearing entitled ‘AI and the American Dream: Promoting Innovation, Affordability, and American Dominance’ the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs will be hearing from four witnesses who will discuss a broad range of issues related to artificial intelligence (AI), including export controls, risks associated with a potential AI financial bubble and future taxpayer bailouts, and the impact of AI-driven data center expansion on energy costs and affordability for American families.
The four testimonies to be delivered at 10:00am show a striking range of views on AI policy, even among witnesses who share some basic premises. All four treat compute as the foundational resource of the AI economy, agree that the U.S.-China competition is real and consequential, and acknowledge that AI’s economic effects are unevenly distributed. Beyond that, consensus quickly breaks down.
The Four Witnesses
David Feith — Hudson Institute
Feith is the most hawkish on export controls. His testimony is essentially a detailed indictment of enforcement failures — smuggling, remote access loopholes, the Blackwell gap, lax Entity List additions, distillation attacks — and a call to pass a specific package of bipartisan bills. He frames the entire competition in civilizational terms: the contest is about whether AI serves systems that restrain or concentrate power.
Mike Flynn — Information Technology Industry Council (ITI)
Flynn speaks for the tech industry and threads a careful needle. He supports export controls in principle but worries that poorly designed ones will hurt U.S. companies more than China. His distinctive contribution is the ‘AI stack’ framing — arguing that regulation at any one layer (chips, models, cloud) ripples unpredictably through the others. He explicitly opposes the Chip Security Act’s government tracking mandate and warns against Congress micromanaging BIS rather than resourcing it properly.
Will Rinehart — American Enterprise Institute
Rinehart is the empiricist of the group. His testimony largely ignores China and export controls, except in an appendix on compute economics, and instead marshals academic research to answer: what is AI doing to workers and firms? His central finding is that task-level productivity gains are real but do not automatically translate to firm-level or economy-wide effects — and that the historical analogy to electrification suggests transformation will be slow, uneven, and dependent on complementary investment. He is the only witness focused primarily on the domestic economic evidence.
Dr. Sarah Myers West — AI Now Institute
Dr. West is the dissenting voice. Where the other three assume the goal is American AI dominance and debate how best to achieve it, Dr. West questions whether the current trajectory serves the public at all. She focuses on financial systemic risks, the circular spending arrangements, off-balance-sheet special purpose vehicles, private credit exposure, and the possibility of a bubble that could wipe out more household wealth than the 2008 crisis. She is the only witness who uses the word ‘bailout’ and the only one to argue Congress should scrutinize rather than accelerate AI infrastructure investment.
Key Themes in the Testimonies
• Compute as the decisive resource: All four witnesses agree that compute — chips, data centers, power — is the foundational input of the AI economy. They disagree sharply about who controls it, how to protect U.S. advantages, and whether the current investment trajectory is sustainable.
• Export controls: three witnesses debate how to strengthen them; one questions the premise entirely. Feith wants tighter enforcement now. Flynn wants allied coordination and worries about unilateral overreach. West does not address them as a priority.
• AI’s economic effects: Rinehart provides the most granular evidence — productivity gains are real at the task level but slow to diffuse economy-wide. West argues harms are already here. Flynn emphasizes job creation. Feith focuses almost entirely on national security.
• Financial risk: Only West raises the systemic financial risk question — the circular AI spending deals, private credit exposure, and the potential for a bubble larger than 2008. The other three do not address this at all.
• The sharpest fault line: Three witnesses accept the premise that American AI dominance is the goal and debate execution. Dr. West questions whether that goal — pursued as currently structured — serves anyone outside a small group of Silicon Valley firms.
Four witnesses’ divergence in themes
MRV
Note: ‘Not addressed’ indicates the witness did not write about this issue in his/her submitted testimony. It does not necessarily indicate disagreement.
Senator Elizabeth Warren and AI
Eyes should be on Senator Elizabeth Warren who has focused on the risks that this administration’s AI policy could pose to the financial system as well as to ordinary Americans. According to a Senate Banking aide Senator Warren is concerned that AI companies are on a spending spree to build data centers. “This is the infrastructure that supports AI, and families in areas surrounding these data centers are already paying the price. Residential electricity prices have risen more than 16% since Trump took office – are expected to climb as much as 40% more by 2030. One in three households is struggling to pay their utility bills. The Trump administration’s response has been a weak request for voluntary commitments from big corporations—and leaves families footing the bill.”
Senator Warren has made several proposals to address risks of AI
X
According to the aide, another concern the senator has is that “AI companies are addicted to debt. Early in AI development, these companies financed their own investments, but now they are borrowing upwards of $1 trillion dollars to finance spending on data centers, chips, and other AI infrastructure. They borrow from private credit funds that borrow from banks. This means that if AI tumbles, it will bring down many in private credit and that, in turn, will risk bringing down giant banks.”
Additionally, Senator Warren has focused on NVIDIA that makes the chips powering AI’s advances. Her concern is that NVIDIA’s valuation has ballooned to nearly $5 trillion dollars; this makes NVIDIA the world’s biggest company and NVIDIA’s CEO Jensen Huang an immensely powerful person. Last year, Senators Warren and Jim Banks (R-Ind.), sent a letter to Huang concerning his trip to the People’s Republic of China. In the letter, the Senators warned that the visit could undermine U.S. export controls and legitimize companies that cooperate closely with the PRC’s military and intelligence services.
Recently, Senator Warren invited Huang to testify at this hearing, but he declined to attend. Huang and NVIDIA have been lobbying intensely to the Trump Administration to allow the sale of advanced chips to China. Huang’s efforts have alarmed senior military leaders, who have warned that such technology could strengthen China’s military and put America’s national security at risk.
Senator Warren’s response to Huang not attending the Senate Banking hearing
X
According to a Senate Banking aide, Senator Warren is likely to mention that “Americans are concerned about what looks like corruption in plain sight driving Trump Administration AI policy.” Moreover, “influential tech giants are concentrating ownership over powerful technologies and attempting to rewrite the rules that govern them. A corrupt Trump Administration is giving them whatever they want. The impact on American families is massive.”
Forbes Articles By Mayra Rodríguez Valladares
Congressional Testimonies By This Author
Strengthening Accountability at the Federal Reserve: Lessons and Opportunities for Reform
A Holistic Review of Regulators: Regulatory Overreach and Economic Consequences