To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
As corporate influence grows, independent journalism is more important than ever. If you value reporting that puts people and the planet first, please support Common Dreams this Giving Tuesday. We couldn't do it without you—thank you for keeping independent journalism alive.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said no government rescue of artificial intelligence firms "as healthcare is being denied to everyday Americans."
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Tuesday that the federal government should not consider a taxpayer bailout of the artificial intelligence industry as fears grow that the rapidly expanding sector poses systemic risks to the global economy.
"Should this bubble pop, we should not be entertaining a bailout," Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said during a House subcommittee hearing. "We should not entertain a bailout of these corporations as healthcare is being denied to everyday Americans, as SNAP and food assistance is being denied to everyday Americans, precipitating some of the very mental crises that people are turning to AI chat bots to try to resolve."
Ocasio-Cortez echoed the concerns of industry insiders and analysts who have warned in recent weeks that the AI investment boom created a bubble whose rupture would cause far-reaching economic carnage.
"We're talking about a massive economic bubble," the New York Democrat said Tuesday. "Depending on the exposure of that bubble, we could see 2008-style threats to economic stability."
Ocasio-Cortez's remarks came on the same day that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) sounded the alarm about potential Trump administration plans to "use taxpayer dollars to prop up OpenAI and other AI companies at the expense of working class Americans."
"The Trump administration’s close ties with AI executives and donors—including millions of dollars of contributions to President Trump’s new ballroom project—raise concerns that the administration will bail out AI executives and shareholders while leaving taxpayers to foot the bill," Warren wrote in a letter to the White House's AI czar, David Sacks.
OpenAI, a firm at the center of the nascent industry, has reportedly been in discussion with the Trump administration about the possibility of receiving federal loan guarantees for the construction of chip factories in the United States. Robert Weissman, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, warned earlier this month that "it is entirely possible that OpenAI and the White House are concocting a scheme to siphon taxpayer money into OpenAI’s coffers, perhaps with some tribute paid to Trump and his family."
"Perhaps not so coincidentally, OpenAI president Greg Brockman was among the attendees at a dinner for donors to Trump’s White House ballroom, though neither he nor OpenAI have been reported to be actual donors," Weissman added.
Writing for the Wall Street Journal last week, Sarah Myers West and Amba Kak of the AI Now Institute observed that "the federal government is already bailing out the AI industry with regulatory changes and public funds that will protect companies in the event of a private sector pullback."
"The Trump administration is rolling out the red carpet for these firms," they wrote. "The administration’s AI Action Plan aims to accelerate AI adoption within the government and military by pushing changes to regulatory and procurement processes. Government contracting offers stable, often lucrative long-term contracts—exactly what these firms will need if the private market for AI dips."
"Federal policy has jumped the gun: We don’t yet know if AI will transform the economy or even be profitable," West and Kak added. "Yet Washington is insulating the industry from all sorts of risk. If a bubble does pop, we’ll all be left holding the bag."
"Hard not to see this as a corrupt politician collecting on his legislatively permitted bribe," said one Democratic lawmaker.
While critics fumed at the prospect of Republican US senators suing to collect $1 million or more each in taxpayer money as part of a bizarre provision slipped into the government funding bill, one senior GOP lawmaker said Wednesday that he's all in on the proposal—and won't stop at a mere million.
Tucked away in the Senate plan to end the longest federal government shutdown in US history is legislation compelling telecommunications companies to notify lawmakers if their phone records were subjected to seizure as part of former Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation into President Donald Trump’s role in the January 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection and effort to illegally remain in power after losing the 2020 election.
The bill allows senators who were not informed that their records were accessed to sue the government for $500,000 each time their data was subpoenaed or reviewed without notification. Just eight Republican senators would qualify.
Congressman Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) slammed the proposal as a "million-dollar jackpot" paid for by taxpayers.
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) also weighed in, saying on the House floor Wednesday that "it is unconscionable that what we are debating right now is legislation that will give eight senators over $1 million a piece and we are robbing people of their food assistance and of their healthcare to pay for it."
"How is this even on the floor?" she asked before the House sent the bill to Trump's desk. "How can we vote to enrich ourselves by stealing from the American people?"
AOC: "It is unconscionable that what we are debating right now is legislation that will give 8 senators over $1 million a piece and we are robbing people of their food assistance and of their healthcare to pay for it. How is this even on the floor? How can we vote to enrich… pic.twitter.com/eYCJKLlJx6
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 12, 2025
However, on Wednesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) embraced the proposal.
"Oh, definitely," Graham replied when asked if he would sue. "And if you think I'm going to settle this thing for a million dollars? No. I want to make it so painful, no one ever does this again."
“If I’m subject to a criminal investigation, then the rules apply to me like they would any other citizen, but this wasn’t about investigating me or other senators for a crime. It’s a fishing expedition,” Graham asserted. “It will also cover any Democrats in this Senate this term that may have something happened to them."
But Democrats—and many Republicans—have expressed staunch opposition to the proposal, with Congressman Gabe Amo (D-RI) writing on X, "Hard not to see this as a corrupt politician collecting on his legislatively permitted bribe."
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) called the provision "a really bad look."
At least one GOP House lawmaker has vowed to vote against the continuing resolution unless the provision is rescinded:
However, the proposal was not removed, and Steube was one of 209 House lawmakers who voted against the bill—which passed with 222 "yes" votes and was subsequently signed by Trump.
Raskin ripped Graham on X Thursday, saying, "Sir, you were treated like every other American who gets caught up in a massive criminal event or conspiracy."
"Do you now want to ban all grand jury subpoenas of phone records," he added, "or just vote yourself a million-dollar taxpayer jackpot because you got one and you think senators should have special privileges over everyone else?"
“We are talking about a coordinated effort of eight senators, with the knowledge of Leader Schumer, voting to break with the entire Democratic Party," said the New York Democrat.
As the US House of Representatives prepared for a vote to reopen the federal government, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Wednesday called out members of her own Democratic Party in the Senate, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who capitulated to Republicans in the shutdown fight, for which they received "nothing" in return.
Shortly before the government shut down over Republicans' refusal to address a looming healthcare crisis, Axios reported that the New York congresswoman was preparing to run for president or Senate in 2028. In the lead-up to Wednesday's vote, she was asked at least twice on camera about how Schumer, also a New Yorker, handled the shutdown.
"I think it's important that we understand that this is not just about Sen. Schumer, but that this is about the Democratic Party," she told CNN's Manu Raju. "Sen. Schumer—there's no one vote that ended this shutdown. We are talking about a coordinated effort of eight senators, with the knowledge of Leader Schumer, voting to break with the entire Democratic Party in exchange for nothing."
New — Asked AOC about Chuck Schumer’s handling of shutdown. (He voted NO on bill)
“We are talking about a coordinated effort of eight senators with the knowledge of Leader Schumer, voting to break with the entire Democratic Party in exchange for nothing,” she told me pic.twitter.com/fzDkMGMfzy
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) November 12, 2025
Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Dick Durbin of Illinois, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Jacky Rosen of Nevada, and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, along with Independent Sen. Angus King of Maine, who caucuses with Democrats, joined Republicans for both the procedural and final votes.
Unlike the upper chamber, Republicans have enough members in the House to advance legislation without Democratic support. The GOP's continuing resolution neither reverses Medicaid cuts from the budget package that President Donald Trump signed in July nor extends expiring tax credits for people who buy health insurance on the Affordable Care Act exchanges.
"And now people's healthcare costs are going to be skyrocketing, and we want to make sure that we have a path to ending this moment, and finding relief for them right now," Ocasio-Cortez told CNN. "But I think that when we talk about this debate about the Democratic Party, that it is indeed about the party writ large, and our ability to fight or not."
While no senators in the caucus have demanded that Schumer step aside yet, The Hill on Wednesday compiled comments from the growing list of House Democrats who have called for new leadership: Reps. Glenn Ivey (Md.), Ro Khanna (Calif.), Mike Levin (Calif.), Seth Moulton (Mass.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Delia Ramirez (Ill.), Shri Thanedar (Mich.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.).
In a video circulated by C-SPAN on Wednesday, a reporter directly asked Ocasio-Cortez whether Schumer should stay in his leadership role. The progressive congresswoman's response was similar to her remarks to CNN.
Q: "Should Schumer stay as minority leader?"
.@RepAOC @AOC: "This problem is bigger than one person. It actually is bigger than the minority leader in the Senate...A leader is a reflection of the party and Senate Democrats have selected their leadership to represent them." pic.twitter.com/5cPi5GQzov
— CSPAN (@cspan) November 12, 2025
"I think what is so important for folks to understand is that this problem is bigger than one person, and it actually is bigger than the minority leader in the Senate," Ocasio-Cortez said. "You had eight Senate Democrats who coordinated... their own votes on this."
She also noted that two are retiring—Durbin and Shaheen—and the rest aren't up for reelection next year, thanks to the Senate's revolving cycles. Cortez Masto, Hassan, and Fetterman have until 2028, while Kaine, King, and Rosen have until 2030. She suggested that those who run for another term are hoping that "people are going to forget this moment."
"I think what's important is that we understand that... a leader is a reflection of the party. And Senate Democrats have selected their leadership to represent them," Ocasio-Cortez said. "And so, the question needs to be bigger than just one person. We have several Senate primaries this cycle."
"I know I'm being asked about New York. That is years from now. I have to remind my own constituents," she continued, directing attention to the 2026 races. "We actually do have Senate elections this year, and my hope is that people across this country actually participate in their primary elections in selecting their leadership."