El Sayed, a progressive contender in Michigan’s August 4 Senate primary, announced Tuesday that artificial‑intelligence firms should be regulated as public utilities and partially owned by the federal government. He warned that without such oversight, AI could pose “catastrophic risks” to the social contract and even humanity’s existencce.

El Sayed’s “American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act” Proposal

In a campaign statement, El Sayed endorsed Senator Bernie Sanders’ American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act, which would give the federal government voting shares and board seats in major AI companies. The legislation aims to let the state block harmful decisions and steer AI development toward public benefit.. He stressed that ownership alone would not suffice without strict enforcement, likening the needed safeguards to federal banking oversight.

How El Sayed’s Plan Differs From McMorrow and Stevens

State Senator Mallory McMorrow, another primary contender, also prioritises AI regulation but rejects public ownership, favoring targeted oversight mechanisms instead. Representative Haley Stevens, a former member of a bipartisan AI task force, promotes public‑private partnerships and has authored several AI‑safety bills. El Sayed’s approach, by contrast, seeks to shift the entire governance model, treating AI companies as utilities that must serve the public interest first.

Historical Parallel: Federal Banking Oversight as a Template

El Sayed pointed to the post‑Great‑Depression banking reforms as a blueprint for AI governance , arguing that just as banks are required to maintain capital reserves and undergo regular examinations, AI firms should meet safety standards before releasing powerful models. He warned that “even with public ownership, a lack of enforcement could lead to catastrophic failures,” echoing concerns raised by tech ethicists over unchecked model deployment.

What Voters and Critics Say About Public‑Utility AI

Supporters in El Sayed’s grassroots network say the proposal resonates with constituents worried about job displacement, privacy erosion, and algorithmic bias. Critics, however, argue that government control could stifle innovation and lead to bureaucratic overreach. As the race tightens, the debate over whether AI should be treated as a utility is becoming a litmus test for broader progressive tech policy .

Open Question: Will Federal Enforcement Mechanisms Be Built Fast Enough?

The plan hinges on creating a new federal enforcement agency capable of monitoring AI firms in real time—a detail that remains vague. El Sayed has not outlined how the agency would be staffed, funded, or coordinated with existing regulators, leaving a key uncertainty for voters and policymakers alike.

According to the campaign release, El Sayed’s stance reflects a growing progressive anxiety about the “unchecked power of tech giants.” As the primary approaches, his bold regulatory vision could force the other candidates to clarify their own AI strategies,shaping Michigan’s—and potentially the nation’s—future tech governance.