美国两党罕见共识：人工智能发展需加强监管

Democrats and Republicans agree: AI is scary

民主党与共和党达成共识：人工智能令人担忧

It’s about the only thing that unites them

这几乎是唯一能让两党立场一致的议题

June 25th 2026

2026 年 6 月 25 日

“Most Americans already know AI could be transformative and dangerous at the same time. They’re not confused about that,” says Alex Bores, a computer scientist and New York state assemblyman. “What they want to know is whether anyone in government is actually going to do something about it.” Mr Bores campaigned on the promise that he would, making AI regulation the centre of his bid for Congress in a crowded Democratic primary in New York on June 23rd.

"大多数美国人早已明白，人工智能既可能带来颠覆性变革，也蕴含着巨大风险。他们对此心知肚明。" 计算机科学家、纽约州众议员亚历克斯·博雷斯指出，"他们真正关心的是，政府中是否有人会真正采取行动。" 博雷斯将人工智能监管作为自己竞选国会席位的主打议题，并参与了6月23日在纽约州举行的民主党初选。

So, some big AI firms tried to crush him. A group funded by tech titans spent millions trying to defeat him for, among other things, wanting a national version of a New York state bill he co-authored that requires AI firms to disclose alarming incidents and not release any model that creates an unreasonable risk of critical harm. Yet another group, funded by other AI firms, spent millions supporting him, precisely because he wants to impose national guardrails. In the end he lost narrowly to Micah Lasher, a more conventional candidate who said that he, too, would stand up to tech firms.

因此，一些大型人工智能企业试图阻击他。一个由科技巨头资助的组织斥资数百万美元试图击败他，原因之一是他主张将其参与起草的纽约州法案推广为全国性立法——该法案要求人工智能企业披露危险事件，并禁止发布任何可能造成不合理重大风险的模型。另一家由其他人工智能企业资助的组织同样投入数百万美元支持他，正是因为他主张在全国范围内设立监管防线。最终，他以微弱劣势输给了更为传统的候选人迈卡·拉舍，后者同样声称会与科技企业抗衡。

The question of how AI will shape society has become politically explosive in the country where the technology is most advanced. Both Republicans and Democrats have factions that relish the potential rewards of AI, and fear that clumsy regulation will let Chinese models, which are only a few months behind, catch up. Donald Trump's advisers include David Sacks, who favours developing AI as rapidly as possible. As Mr Bores's case illustrates, the industry itself is deeply divided. However, voters are not.

在人工智能技术最为先进的美国，人工智能将如何重塑社会这一问题已成为政治上极具争议的焦点。共和党与民主党内部都存在看好人工智能潜在红利、同时又担心僵化监管会让仅落后数月的中国模型迎头赶上的派系。唐纳德·特朗普的顾问团队中包括戴维·萨克斯，他是快速推进人工智能发展的倡导者。正如博雷斯的案例所示，人工智能行业内部本身存在严重分歧，但选民的态度却高度一致。

Three-quarters of Americans think AI should be more regulated, according to YouGov, a pollster, with Republicans nearly as keen as Democrats. Almost two-thirds of Americans think the technology is advancing too quickly, versus only 2% who say "too slowly", according to the Pew Research Centre. Policy is struggling to keep up with the pace of change.

根据民调机构舆观（YouGov）的数据，四分之三的美国人认为应当加强对人工智能的监管，共和党人的热情几乎与民主党人相当。皮尤研究中心的调查表明，近三分之二的美国人认为这项技术发展过快，而认为"发展过慢"的比例仅为2%。政策制定正努力追赶变革的步伐。

Americans of both parties fear that AI will disrupt people's lives, their jobs and even their children's future romantic attachments. A whopping 45% say they are very or somewhat concerned that AI might cause human extinction, according to YouGov. Fully 65% think it will reduce the number of jobs available in America (74% of Democrats and 56% of Republicans). More than 70% fret about the exacerbation of mental-health problems and the concentration of power in tech firms.

两党美国人都担忧人工智能会扰乱他们的生活、工作，甚至影响子女未来的感情生活。根据舆观的调查，高达45%的人表示非常或相当担心人工智能可能导致人类灭绝。整整65%的美国人认为人工智能会减少美国的就业机会（民主党人中这一比例达74%，共和党人为56%）。超过70%的人担忧人工智能会加剧心理健康问题，并导致权力向科技企业集中。

The intensity of Americans' anxiety sets them apart. A poll by Pew last year found that Americans were more pessimistic about AI than people in any of 24 other countries surveyed. More recent polling by YouGov finds that 61% of Americans think AI will affect society "a lot"; only 5% think it will affect it only "a little" or "not at all". For all the promises of riches and new drugs, Americans think that AI's effects will be more negative than positive, by 46% to 31%. Democrats are slightly—but only slightly—more gloomy than Republicans.

美国人焦虑程度之深使他们与众不同。皮尤去年的一项民调发现，在接受调查的24个国家中，美国人对人工智能的态度最为悲观。舆观最新的民调显示，61%的美国人认为人工智能将"极大地"影响社会；仅有5%的人认为影响"很小"或"完全没有"。尽管人工智能有望带来财富和新药研发，但美国人认为其影响弊大于利，负面评价占46%，正面评价仅31%。民主党人比共和党人略显悲观，但差距非常有限。

For the progressive left, AI is a hotpot of repulsive ingredients. They worry it will destroy union jobs. They are NIMBYish about data centres. They detest billionaires, and don't get them started on the trillionaire who pals around with Mr Trump and wants to put data centres in space.

对进步左翼而言，人工智能简直是各种令人厌恶元素的集合。他们担心人工智能会摧毁工会岗位。他们对数据中心持邻避态度。他们憎恨亿万富翁，更别提那位与特朗普称兄道弟、还想把数据中心建到太空的万亿富翁了。

Today's "tech barons…are far worse than the railroad or coal barons of the 'Great Gatsby' age," says Malcolm Kenyatta, the vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee. "With the development of AI, you have a small group of very rich, mostly white men trying to determine the future for our communities, for our society, for our economy," says Igor Volsky of Tax the Greedy Billionaires, a pressure group.

民主党全国委员会副主席马尔科姆·肯亚塔表示："当今的'科技大亨……比《了不起的盖茨比》时代的铁路或煤炭大亨还要恶劣得多。" 压力集团"向贪婪的亿万富翁征税"的伊戈尔·沃尔斯基称："随着人工智能的发展，一小群极其富有、以白人男性为主的群体正在试图为我们的社区、社会和经济决定未来。"

Progressives also fret about the effects of AI on human relationships. "I have a ten-year-old. I'm concerned that very soon my child might develop a relationship with an AI chatbot," says Maurice Mitchell, the leader of the Working Families Party, a left-wing party that endorses Democrats such as Zohran Mamdani. He notes that, in the absence of regulation, some AI tools are marketed "as though they can replace actual therapists [and] actual friends". Left-wing laments are echoed by some on the right. Josh Hawley, a Republican senator, is among the most concerned. "The voter backlash is increasing," he observes. He worries that AI could disrupt 40-50% of entry-level white-collar jobs, and then come for blue-collar jobs, too. It would be fine to use AI to make, say, lorry-driving safer, he says, but he would ban self-driving lorries. In this, he makes common ground with organised labour. On June 16th, at a meeting with the Teamsters union, he accused "mega corporations" of having "lost their moral compass", reports Axios, a news website. If AI generates fortunes for the few while tossing the rest on the scrapheap, he told The Economist, "I don't think you can sustain a democracy."

进步派同时担忧人工智能对人际关系的影响。工人家庭党（该左翼政党支持佐赫兰·马姆达尼等民主党人）领袖莫里斯·米切尔表示："我有个10岁的孩子。我担心用不了多久，我的孩子可能就会与人工智能聊天机器人产生情感联系。" 他指出，在缺乏监管的情况下，部分人工智能工具在营销时"仿佛可以替代真正的心理治疗师和真正的朋友"。左翼的忧虑也得到了一些右翼人士的响应。共和党参议员乔希·霍利是最为担忧的人士之一。他指出："选民的反弹正在加剧。" 他担心人工智能可能冲击40%至50%的初级白领岗位，随后还会波及蓝领岗位。他说，用人工智能提高卡车驾驶安全性是可以接受的，但他会禁止自动驾驶卡车。在这一点上，他与有组织的工会找到了共同立场。据新闻网站Axios报道，6月16日，他在与国际卡车司机工会会面时，指责"巨型公司""丧失了道德指南针"。他向《经济学人》表示，如果人工智能只为少数人创造财富，却将其他人抛入废物堆，"我认为民主制度将无法维系。"

Like his colleagues on the left, Mr Hawley is also anxious about social effects. Young people are hooked on screens and shunning marriage and parenthood, worries Mr Hawley. AI will "accelerate those trends". He adds another fear, grounded in faith: that the plutocrats who control AI will try to turn themselves into superhumans, augmented by technology. They may even try to "live infinitely in the cloud". In his revulsion at this Mr Hawley, a Protestant, sounds a lot like the pope, who recently fretted that "transhumanism" may allow a technological elite to think that some lives are "less worthy" than others.

与左翼同僚一样，霍利同样担忧人工智能的社会影响。霍利担心年轻人沉迷于屏幕，回避婚姻和生育。人工智能将"加速这些趋势"。他还提出了另一个基于信仰的担忧：控制人工智能的财阀们会试图借助技术将自己转变为超人类。他们甚至可能试图"在云端永生"。作为新教徒的霍利对此深感厌恶，其态度听起来与教皇十分相似——教皇最近也担忧"超人类主义"可能让技术精英认为某些生命"不如其他生命有价值"。

On the ground, the backlash against AI manifests itself as opposition to new data centres, which are accused of hogging electricity. Bills to freeze construction of such centres have been proposed in at least ten states. Yet "the data centre fights are not just about energy, water, land use [and] noise," says Brendan Steinhauser, a Republican who heads the Alliance for Secure AI, a lobby group. "They're also about AI's impact on society."

在现实中，对人工智能的抵制表现为反对新建数据中心，这些中心被指责消耗大量电力。至少10个州已提出暂停建设此类中心的法案。但游说组织"安全人工智能联盟"负责人、共和党人布伦丹·斯坦豪泽表示："数据中心的争议不仅仅关乎能源、水资源、土地利用和噪音问题，还关乎人工智能对社会的影响。"

"The accelerationist or 'let them cook' mentality has less influence than it did a year ago," Mr Steinhauser says. "People want to slow it down and get it right." What getting AI policy "right" means in practice is unclear. Technology and politics move at utterly different speeds: a new model is born in the time it takes Congress to schedule a hearing. Dozens of AI bills have been drafted, some of them hundreds of pages long, covering everything from tougher safety checks to tighter rules on surveillance. Nothing big has passed yet.

斯坦豪泽称："加速主义或'放手发展'的思维模式，影响力已不如一年前。人们希望放慢脚步，把事情做好。" 但在实践中，什么才是"正确"的人工智能政策，目前仍不明朗。技术与政治的运行速度完全不同：国会安排一场听证会的时间，就足以诞生一个新的模型。目前已起草了数十项人工智能法案，部分长达数百页，涵盖从更严格的安全检查到更严密的监控规则等各个方面，但尚未有重大法案通过。

The president can act more quickly, but has been inconsistent. Last year the Trump administration sought to quash state regulation on AI by executive orders and legislative tricks. A White House AI legislative framework published in March was blandly permissive. Three months later Mr Trump turned draconian, banning foreigners from accessing the most powerful American AI models, prompting their maker, Anthropic, to close them to all.

总统可以更快行动，但政策立场前后不一。去年，特朗普政府试图通过行政命令和立法手段压制各州对人工智能的监管。白宫今年3月发布的人工智能立法框架态度温和、过于宽容。三个月后，特朗普却转向严厉，禁止外国人访问最强大的美国人工智能模型，促使其开发商Anthropic将它们对所有人关闭。

More coherent policymaking is needed. Dealing with the possible long-term effects of AI, such as mass job losses or surging inequality, will require buy-in from both Congress and the president. There may be common ground. Bernie Sanders, a left-wing senator, would confiscate a 50% stake in the big AI firms and give it to ordinary Americans. Mr Trump, too, says the public should have a stake in AI firms, though he is hazier about how they would get it. A formula that gives voters a share of tech firms' future profits would have bipartisan appeal. If they become as powerful as boosters predict, the pressure for redistribution could grow politically irresistible.

美国需要更加一致的政策制定。应对人工智能可能带来的长期影响，如大规模失业或日益加剧的不平等，需要获得国会和总统的共同认可。双方或许存在共同点。左翼参议员伯尼·桑德斯主张没收大型人工智能企业50%的股份，分给普通美国人。特朗普也声称公众应该持有人工智能企业的股份，但对于如何实现，他的表述更为模糊。让选民分享科技企业未来利润的方案对两党都有吸引力。如果这些企业真如支持者所预言的那样强大，要求财富再分配的压力可能在政治上变得无法阻挡。

However, the details will be contentious. Many on the left, and quite a few in Silicon Valley, favour a universal basic income. Many on the right fear this would undermine people's will to work. "I hate universal basic income," says Mr Hawley, because "that's just the government paying people not to work, and that ends up taking away people's independence."

然而，具体细节必将引发争议。许多左翼人士和相当一部分硅谷人士支持全民基本收入。许多右翼人士担心这会削弱人们的工作意愿。霍利表示："我讨厌全民基本收入，因为这只是政府花钱让人们不去工作，最终会剥夺人们的独立性。"

As the midterms approach, America faces a situation with few, if any, precedents. The topic that arguably terrifies voters the most is one on which neither party has a coherent platform. Expect that to change before November. If party strategists are stumped for ideas, there's a handy new tool that might help them.

随着中期选举临近，美国正面临一个几乎没有先例的局面：可以说最让选民恐惧的议题，却是两党都没有一套连贯政策纲领的领域。预计这一状况将在11月前发生变化。如果两党战略家苦于缺乏创意，倒是有个便捷的新工具或许能帮上忙。

transformative a. 变革性的

assemblyman n. 州众议员

bid for 竞选，角逐

primary n. 初选

crush v. 打压，击溃

titan n. 巨头，巨擘

co-author v. 共同撰写，合著

disclose v. 披露，公开

guardrail n. 护栏；监管约束措施

narrowly ad. 以微弱差距地

explosive a. 爆炸性的，极具争议的

faction n. 派系，派别

relish v. 看好，享受

clumsy a. 笨拙的，僵化的

pollster n. 民意调查机构

versus prep. 与……相比

disrupt v. 扰乱，打乱

romantic attachment 婚恋关系，情感依恋

whopping a. 巨大的，惊人的

exacerbation n. 加剧，恶化

concentration n. 集中，集聚

set apart 使突出，使与众不同

pessimistic a. 悲观的

progressive a. 进步主义的

repulsive a. 令人反感的

NIMBYish a. 邻避主义的

detest v. 憎恶，痛恨

trillionaire n. 万亿富翁

pal around with 与……往来密切

baron n. 大亨，巨头

pressure group 压力集团，游说团体

endorse v. 支持，背书

lament n. 哀叹，不满

echo v. 呼应，附和

backlash n. 强烈抵制，集体反对

lorry n. 卡车，货运汽车

common ground 共同点，一致立场

organised labour 工会组织

scrapheap n. 废物堆

sustain v. 维持，支撑

shun v. 回避，避开

parenthood n. 为人父母，生育

grounded in 基于，以……为依据

plutocrat n. 财阀，富豪

augment v. 增强，扩充

revulsion n. 反感，厌恶

transhumanism n. 超人类主义

manifest itself as 表现为

hog v. 大量占用，耗费

accelerationist n./a. 加速主义者；加速主义的

schedule v. 安排，排定

surveillance n. 监控，监视

inconsistent a. 前后不一的

quash v. 推翻，撤销

executive order 行政命令

blandly ad. 平淡地，乏善可陈地

permissive a. 放任的，宽容的

draconian a. 严厉的，严苛的

coherent a. 连贯的，一致的

buy-in n. 认同，共识

confiscate v. 没收，充公

stake n. 股份

hazy a. 模糊的，不清楚的

bipartisan a. 两党的，跨党派的

booster n. 支持者，鼓吹者

redistribution n. 再分配

irresistible a. 无法抗拒的

contentious a. 有争议的

universal basic income 全民基本收入

undermine v. 削弱，损害

midterm n. 中期选举

precedent n. 先例，前例

platform n. 政纲，施政纲领

stumped a. 被难住的

handy a. 方便的，好用的