OpenAI's Policy Chief Pitches a New Deal for AI Ahead of 2028

OpenAI chief global affairs officer Chris Lehane has published an essay that frames AI's economic disruption against Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, arguing that the 2028 presidential election could be a defining moment for the technology. He wants politicians to develop policies that answer Americans' anxiety about AI rather than merely paying lip service to anti-AI sentiment and the backlash against data centers.

The central analogy is the 1930s, when industrialization and the Great Depression shattered the old economic order and the federal government answered with a set of programs and reforms. Lehane argues Americans feel a similar loss of control over their economic futures and urges politicians to find a “compelling third path” that lets people share in AI's benefits.

He lays out five policy priorities spanning worker protections, education, AI safety and data center development. On taxes, he proposes incentives for workers to learn AI skills, easier capital access for entrepreneurs, and new approaches to employee ownership and profit-sharing.

TechCrunch notes the essay lands just after midterms in which Democrats flipped control of Congress amid frustration over the cost of living. Kate Brennan, who leads AI and corporate power policy at the AI Now Institute, told TechCrunch that the rhetoric marks a notable shift from last year's agenda, which focused on accelerating development, cutting regulatory barriers and expanding infrastructure.

Much of the criticism concerns implementation. Brennan said invoking a New Deal metaphor means invoking state capacity to actually benefit the public, while the document was written by a private company advocating for its own benefit — ahistorical at best and harmful at worst. She noted that Lehane's tax ideas are incentives, not binding requirements ensuring workers share in AI-generated wealth.

Data centers are the second fault line. Lehane acknowledges concerns about them but emphasizes construction jobs and local tax revenue, warning that politicians who back a moratorium could jeopardize America's lead over China — a comparison he extends to the 2002 vote authorizing the Iraq war.

On child safety and education he stresses age-appropriate protections and safeguards around AI companions for minors, and warns against keeping AI out of classrooms on the grounds that it would widen gaps between wealthy students and children in rural communities. That argument assumes AI improves learning, a claim that remains unproven. On safety he calls for enforceable standards, independent evaluations, public oversight and kill switches, though OpenAI opposed California's SB 1047 in 2024.

The essay reads as agenda-setting rather than draft legislation. Its value is telling markets and policymakers in advance which frame OpenAI wants if AI becomes a central 2028 issue: how to share the gains, not how to limit the buildout. The next test is whether that language becomes bill text.