10

Loading video...

By Andrew Stanton

Reporter

0

Share

Newsweek is a Trust Project member

See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.

AI researcher Jacob Coxon’s warning that increasingly powerful artificial intelligence systems could “kill us all by the end of the decade” fueled new calls for Congress to regulate the rapidly developing technology.

Coxon wrote in a series of posts on X that he was resigning from Anthropic over concerns that AI companies are “racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives,” a stark warning about the implications of unchecked AI development on humanity.

In light of his warning, many lawmakers have called for Congress to adapt regulations to AI, a technology that has reshaped all aspects of daily life for Americans.

Read More on Politics

Congress has taken little action on AI, despite ongoing concerns about its impact on the economy, environment and even the existence of humanity. But polls show Americans remain worried about its effects, as it becomes an increasingly salient issue for the 2026 midterm elections.

...

A Dire AI Warning

Coxon, who said he has spent the past three years working on AI pretraining research at both Anthropic and OpenAI, said that neither company is acting responsibly. He said there will soon be “superhuman systems that can hack anything, revolutionize any field overnight, and acquire real power and resources.”

“The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade. This is not a marketing stunt. If anything, many executives and senior researchers will couch their phrasing in the press to sound sensible - but I hear the same people express fear privately. No other human activity poses this level of danger,” he wrote.

His concerns were echoed by Evan Hubinger, an Alignment Science lead at Anthropic, who said he believes there is a greater than 10 percent chance that AI could “kill all humans” within the next decade.

“Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think it is >10% within the next decade. I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to,” he wrote.

Related Story



AI’s Oppenheimer Dilemma Has Arrived

Calls for Action

The post garnered attention from lawmakers calling for more action on AI.

Representative Greg Casar, a Texas Democrat, said the world is facing an AI “emergency” in light of Coxon’s warning.

“An Anthropic researcher just quit, warning they're racing to superintelligence. An employee still there agreed, and put the odds of AI killing all humans above 10%. This is an emergency. Congress must convene hearings and pass my and Bernie’s superintelligence ban,” he wrote.

Representative Lori Trahan, a Massachusetts Democrat who has previously called for Congress to take more action on AI, said on X the call is “coming from inside the house.”

“Safety researchers are resigning, powerful AI models are breaking out of their labs, and companies are racing ahead anyway. It's past time for Congress to get off the sidelines and do its job. We can start with my bipartisan FRONTIER Act,” she wrote.

Representative Anna Paulina Luna, a Florida Republican, said Congress should convene a special session on AI.

“There are very real impacts to society as we know it. Partisan politics aside, there are massive implications of a race toward super intelligence. This is not a doomer post, as some of the advancements will greatly impact access to healthcare, targeted treatments, increase in safer food production etc… but not enough of Congress is focusing on this,” she wrote.

Representative Pramila Jayapal, a Washington Democrat, wrote on X that AI companies “are out of control and a serious threat to our future.”

“We need to shut down their dangerous models and push out the executives who are signing off on their creation,” she wrote.

Newsweek reached out to the offices of House Speaker Mike Johnson, Senate Majority Leader Jone Thune, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for comment via email.

...

AI Alarms Americans: Recent Poll

Many Americans are concerned about AI's impact, according to a recent poll from YouGov and The Economist.

Here is a look at key takeaways from that poll.

• Thirty-five percent of Americans say there is a “very serious” risk that AI could cause harm, while 34 percent say that risk is “somewhat serious” and 26 percent say it is “slightly serious.” Only 6 percent said it is not serious at all.

• Forty-eight percent said they believe AI will harm the economy, while 28 percent said it will help.
• Fifty-nine percent of Americans wanted increased AI regulation, compared to 6 percent wanting less regulation and 15 percent saying the level of regulation should stay where it is.
• Thirty-seven percent trust Democrats more to handle AI, while 30 percent trust Republicans. An additional 33 percent trust both parties equally.
• Fifty-one percent said the development of data centers is bad for the country, while 20 percent said they are good.

The poll surveyed 1,592 adults from August 28 to 31, 2026 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Regulation Stalls in Congress

Congress has taken little action on AI regulation despite growing concerns from Americans about its impact.

In 2025, lawmakers passed the Take It Down Act, which outlawed AI-generated sexually explicit imagery of a person from being posted online without their consent. It was a landmark AI regulation bill, but little action has followed.

Still, several other pieces of legislation have been introduced to regulate the industry.

While many lawmakers are renewing calls for regulation, some congressional leaders have not commented on the warning. Some lawmakers have instead stressed that competing with China to maintain an AI edge is critical for security.

The AI arms race is a key challenge for those seeking regulation. Even if the United States implements regulatory measures, there’s no guarantee other countries will do the same, so some believe it is in the U.S.'s best interests to continue development even as concerns mount.

AI is not a partisan issue, but that does not necessarily mean it will draw bipartisan agreement in Congress, Laurel Harbridge-Yong, a political science professor at Northwestern University, told Newsweek. Politicians in Congress may not want to give the opposing side a policy win, she said.

“Democrats may believe they will do better in November if the Republicans have a record of inaction on AI (and other issues) rather than helping pass legislation. This is similar to the strategy Republicans took when they blocked the immigration deal in 2024,” she said.

"Congress may be reluctant to take action because AI and tech companies are 'well-funded' and politicians don’t want to anger them,” Todd Belt, director of the Political Management Program at George Washington University, told Newsweek.

“I think the money AI firms are pouring into super PACs can certainly have an effect on specific elections. I'm doubtful that many will take up this issue because the cost of doing so is having the well-financed tech companies come after you during the campaign.”

Still, numerous bills have been introduced to regulate the industry. Here is a look at some of those proposals:

Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act

Casar and independent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders announced earlier in September that they are introducing a bill that would “permanently ban the development and deployment of superintelligent AI and temporarily pause advanced AI development until a federal regulator has established safety rules.”

The bill would also establish a new cabinet-level federal agency to protect the public from the dangers of AI and set the U.S. international policy to pursue international agreements and coordination to prevent the development of artificial intelligence anywhere in the world.

Sanders responded to Coxon in a post on X.

"Mr. Coxon is right. The very people building this technology admit that it could threaten the future of humanity. That is why I will soon be introducing legislation to ban superintelligence and pause AI development," he wrote.

...

Frontier Act

Trahan and Representative Jay Obernolte, a California Republican, introduced the Frontier Risk Oversight, National Transparency, Independent Evaluation, and Reporting (FRONTIER) Act back in July. The bill would establish a “national, risk-based framework governing the development and deployment of the most advanced artificial intelligence models,” Trahan’s office said in a statement.

“The FRONTIER Act establishes tiered requirements based on the size of a frontier AI developer, including model cards, risk-management frameworks, independent audits, incident reporting, and ongoing assessments. It also creates a uniform national standard for transparency, auditing, and reporting of catastrophic risk to prevent a patchwork of state regulations,” her office wrote.

The bill has bipartisan support from both Democrats and Republicans.

AI Kill Switch Bill

Representatives Ted Lieu, a California Democrat, and Nataniel Moran, a Texas Republican, introduced a bill that would require AI developers to maintain the technical capacity to “throttle, suspend, or shut them down.”

It would also authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to order a slowdown or shutdown of an AI system if it could cause “catastrophic harm.”

“AI companies are deploying increasingly advanced frontier models and autonomous "agentic" systems capable of independent action. There is currently no requirement that developers of these powerful models maintain a functioning ability to intervene if an AI system begins behaving in unintended or dangerous ways,” Lieu’s office wrote in a statement.

AI Becomes Major Midterm Issue

Ahead of the midterms, AI has become an issue that candidates are increasingly talking about on the campaign trail. Much discussion has focused on the development of data centers and their impact on local communities and the environment. AI-focused super PACs have poured tens of millions of dollars into races across the country as debate over AI regulation continues.

Some Democrats this week announced a new organization called Tomorrow Together that will spend $10 million supporting candidates in favor of AI regulations, including privacy regulations and the construction of data centers, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

It’s an issue that has rare bipartisan agreement in an increasingly polarized country. A recent NBC News Decision Desk poll found that 70 percent are also more worried about AI than 30 percent who say they are more excited about it.

When asked, "Which political party do you trust more to make good policy decisions about AI?" 20 percent said the Democrats, 16 percent said the Republican Party, 44 percent said neither party, 5 percent said both parties equally and 15 percent said not sure.

The poll surveyed 7,105 adults online from August 20 to September 1 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.

Robert Y. Shapiro, professor of political science and in the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University, told Newsweek that the issue of data centers “has more resonance and has evoked bipartisan concerns because of effects on energy and the environment and seems easier to understand.”

It’s unclear whether these comments will make AI a top issue for voters, according to Harbridge-Yong.

“Issues like the economy are likely to remain at the forefront, along with things that are more salient to people like government leadership, immigration and war in the Middle East. I don't know much about how people view AI and the risks it poses (beyond near-term job losses) but suspect that many voters have a hard time seeing a connection between the potential problem of AI growth, regulation policies, and downstream consequences,” she said.

Some candidates running in the midterms have sounded the alarm after the latest warnings.

In a post on X, Connie Chan, a San Francisco supervisor running to succeed retiring Democratic Representative Nancy Pelosi, criticized her opponent Scott Wiener, whose campaign has been supported by Anthropic, according to SFGate.

“AI companies cannot be trusted to police themselves. We need Congress to regulate this technology NOW. And we definitely cannot trust a politician (hint: it's Scott Wiener) supported with $500k from the company that employs this guy,” she wrote on X.

Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Gabe Whisnant and Sam Wilson.

View 0 Comments

Request Reprint & Licensing

Submit Correction

View Editorial & AI Guidelines