Most U.S. voters say Trump and Congress take AI risks too lightly, poll finds

Most registered U.S. voters think Washington is giving AI’s risks too little attention. A Reuters/Ipsos poll released October 7 found that 57% said the Trump administration had not taken those risks seriously enough or at all; 54% said the same of Congress. Support for stricter regulation crossed party lines ahead of November’s midterm elections.

The nationwide online survey gathered responses from 4,506 U.S. adults, including 3,526 registered voters. It ran for six days and had a stated margin of error of two percentage points. The findings below concern voters, rather than the entire adult sample, and measure their views of AI—not whether the harms they fear will occur.

Worker fears versus the race with China

The strongest worker-related concern in the survey was AI itself. Eighty-four percent of voters viewed the technology as a threat to American workers. That exceeded the shares who said the same about competition from foreign workers, at 74%; large corporations, at 73%; and illegal immigration, at 60%. Those comparisons describe perceived threats, not measured job losses.

Trump has argued for rapid AI development and data-center construction as essential to U.S. competitiveness. When challenged about limits on the technology, he has pointed to the risk of falling behind China. Daniel Kokotajlo, a former OpenAI employee, offered a different priority in comments to Reuters: threats to jobs, human health and safety are more pressing than the international technology race.

Calls for stronger rules were not confined to Democrats. Eighty percent of Democratic voters and 61% of Republican voters supported stricter government regulation of AI. About a third of self-identified Republicans also said the Trump administration had not taken AI risks seriously enough or at all.

Broad concern, different limits

Agreement on stricter regulation did not translate into equal support for every restriction. Fifty-six percent of voters backed limits on building data centers. Support reached 69% among Democrats and 55% among independents, but 43% among Republicans—a smaller share than the Republican majority favoring stricter AI regulation generally.

Data-center construction has become an issue in congressional and statewide races, with candidates from both parties urging a pause in the building boom. The poll’s party breakdown shows why a general call for AI oversight and a specific construction limit should not be treated as interchangeable positions.

Concern about losing control of AI was more stable. Sixty-two percent of voters said the technology could get out of control and risk humanity’s future, roughly the same share as in an August 2025 Reuters/Ipsos survey. That contrasts with the increase in opposition to its use for selecting military targets: the two concerns did not move together.

Washington’s answer remains voluntary

The administration has favored voluntary safeguards over sweeping federal regulation, as The Hill noted in its coverage of the survey. The recent safety agreement includes independent auditors assessing whether AI systems work as their designers intended. Participating companies are Nvidia, SpaceX, OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta and Alphabet’s Google.

The agreement states no consequences for a company that chooses not to comply. Congress, meanwhile, has not agreed on legislation setting AI guardrails, and lawmakers are expected to remain away from Washington until after the midterms. The election is November 3, leaving the survey’s demand for stronger oversight alongside a voluntary agreement rather than a new federal law.

Responding to Reuters, a White House official pointed to Trump’s AI task force and its mission of maintaining American leadership. Asked about employment fears, the official said the administration’s priority was a booming economy that gives workers opportunities and limits volatility from short-term disruptions. That response emphasized growth and workforce resilience, rather than a promise of stricter AI regulation.