| |
The Impact A weekly look at the intersection of AI, advocacy, and politics from the team at MFStrategies | www.MFStrategies.com |
|
| |
This week, MFStrategies is excited to highlight PubSent! PubSent is a two way AI texting platform that turns outreach into real conversations at scale. Instead of one way blasts, PubSent’s agents engage supporters, answer questions using your approved talking points, and drive people to clear calls to action like donate, RSVP, volunteer, or vote. Every reply is automatically tagged for sentiment, topics, and support level, so you can see what people think in real time and know exactly who needs a human follow up. By teaming up with MFStrategies, you get priority access to PubSent’s next generation SMS program. Launch smarter persuasion and fundraising conversations with built in measurement from day one. |
|
|
| |
The Impact Podcast Hosts Addie and Hal break down this week's news in 10 minutes |
| The AI Campaign Playbook Our roadmap for how to implement AI safely and effectively in your organization. |
| Vendor Scorecards Coming soon |
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
The politics of AI might shift from abstract fear to a fight over who gets stuck with the bill. Trump is sprinting toward an AI boom narrative—rolling back guardrails, fast-tracking data centers, and trying to kneecap state rules with a “one nation, one AI” order—while warning there’ll be no bailouts if it all goes sideways. States, workers, and voters are being cast in the same quiet role: they absorb the risk, from wage‑setting algorithms and deepfakes to rising energy costs and hospital systems that quietly hardwire AI into life-or-death decisions. Taken together, this is becoming a simple contrast: billionaires and Wall Street upside vs. everyone else’s jobs, bills, and rights. The open question is who moves first to own that story before the next downturn or AI-linked scandal hits. |
|
|
| |
|
AI / Political News of the Week
|
|
| |
| |
GovTech Takeaway Trump’s new executive order seeks to curb state AI rules and threatens broadband funds, but legal pushback is mounting. States are still moving ahead, focusing on quick, measurable AI wins and testing more autonomous “agentic AI” in services and licensing. Expect a patchwork of policies and stronger pressure to show real ROI in 2026.
Why it matters Trump’s order tries to scare states away from strong AI rules by tying them to broadband money, but it rests on shaky legal ground and is already triggering open defiance. For you, 2026 looks less like “no regulation” and more like a patchwork fight over who protects people from AI harms—and whose rules campaigns must actually follow. |
|
| | | Technical.ly Takeaway Trump’s Dec. 11 order moves to curb state AI laws. It creates an AI Litigation Task Force and threatens to hold back leftover BEAD broadband funds from states with “onerous” rules, while exempting child-safety and government-use laws. Lawyers say courts may block this without Congress; enforcement will likely be slow and tied up in lawsuits.
Why it matters Trump’s order tries to freeze a 50‑state AI experiment just as it’s ramping up, betting that legal threats and BEAD funding leverage will scare states into backing off. For campaigns, this is the front line of who sets AI rules: state civil‑rights‑style guardrails vs. a fast‑track for corporate‑friendly deployment. |
|
| | | The New York Times Takeaway Trump is touting AI-fueled growth and record markets while downplaying risks like job losses and a potential bubble. His team rolled back guardrails, sped data center permits, and warned there will be no AI bailouts, even as Fed voices flag near‑term disruption and heavy tech debt.
Why it matters This locks Trump to the upside of the AI boom and hands Democrats the downside narrative if (or when) things crack. The White House is betting jobs, financial stability, and basic safeguards on tech’s promises—without a safety net—creating a clear contrast frame: Wall Street gains vs. worker risk, deregulation vs. guardrails. |
|
| | | POLITICO Takeaway Most Americans dislike AI and want strict rules. Democrats are split between a hard anti‑AI push and pro‑growth moderates, while Republicans are testing attacks tied to data centers and rising energy bills. The party that claims a simple “jobs and bills vs. billionaires” story first could gain in 2026 and 2028.
Why it matters It exposes a rare open field: voters across class and party already distrust AI, but neither party has a clear story or villain yet. For campaigns, this is shaping up like NAFTA 2.0—an emerging “jobs and bills vs. billionaires and data centers” frame that someone will own once a recession or rate spike hits. |
|
| | | POLITICO Takeaway Veena Dubal warns that companies are using AI to set different pay for the same work, based on data about each worker. She calls for banning algorithmic wage discrimination and says generative AI is overhyped for real writing. The same issue spotlights the State Department’s ban on EU/UK content-rule advocates and a slow-roll on new China chip tariffs.
Why it matters It spotlights “algorithmic wage discrimination” as the next frontier of worker exploitation: the same job, different pay, based on opaque data profiles. For campaigns, that’s a ready-made frame to argue AI rules as wage theft, tying tech governance fights to bread-and-butter economic fairness. |
|
| | | Modern Healthcare Takeaway Mount Sinai researchers built an AI tool that scans ICU data to flag ventilated patients at risk of being underfed between days 3–7. In their study, 41%–53% of patients were underfed by day three, a critical window for nutrition. This could prompt faster feeding adjustments and better outcomes for the sickest patients.
Why it matters It shows how AI is quietly moving from flashy diagnostics to unglamorous, life-or-death basics like calories in the ICU. If tools like this stick, expect pressure to embed AI into hospital workflows by default—raising fresh questions about bias, liability, and who pays for yet another “must-have” system. |
|
| | | TokenRing AI via WRAL/FinancialContent Takeaway Trump signed an order asserting federal control over AI rules and preempting stricter state laws in places like California, Colorado, and New York. DOJ will form a task force to challenge state AI laws and push a single, “minimally burdensome” national standard. Big Tech and VCs cheer; states and safety advocates warn of a “race to the bottom.”
Why it matters This order doesn’t just streamline rules; it strips blue states of their main levers on bias, deepfakes, and workplace protections—handing Big Tech a federal shield. Expect years of court fights and a chill on state innovation, while campaigns face more powerful tools and fewer guardrails against abuse. |
|
| | |
| |
Worth thinking about “An executive order cannot create law and cannot preempt state authority.” — Rep. Ted W. Lieu |
|
|
| |
|
