Pinned Tweet
🚨 NetChoice/Echelon Insights Poll: Voters Rank AI Regulation Far Behind Cost of Living, Want One National AI Standard
WASHINGTON – Heading into the final week of the midterms, voters place regulating artificial intelligence (AI) near the bottom of their priorities, according to a new NetChoice survey conducted by Echelon Insights. Asked to choose the top issues for policymakers, 55% of likely voters named inflation and the cost of living and only 9% named regulating AI.
On the question of who should write AI rules, voters favor a single national approach. 68% say Congress should set national AI rules that apply in every state, compared with 19% who say states should set their own, and majorities of Republicans (65%), Independents (64%) and Democrats (72%) agree.
"Washington has spent recent months treating AI regulation as a leading voter concern, but voters say kitchen table issues, like inflation and jobs, are far more worthy of government attention," said @RobPWJ, Vice President of Public Affairs at NetChoice. "On AI, over two-thirds of voters (68%) want the clarity of a national framework rather than a state-by-state patchwork."
KEY FINDINGS:
1. Cost of living leads. 55% named inflation and the cost of living as a top priority, followed by jobs and the economy (25%), ending the war with Iran (22%) and healthcare costs (20%). Groceries are the top pressure on household finances (66%) and the top area voters want the federal government to focus on when working to lower prices (62%).
2. AI regulation ranks low. 9% named regulating AI as a top priority, and only 2% named breaking up large tech companies.
3. Voters use AI and find it helpful. Half of voters (50%) use AI at least a few times a week. Among those who use it, 46% say it has been extremely or very helpful in their daily life or work.
4. Enforce existing law first. A plurality (48%) say existing laws on fraud, discrimination, privacy and consumer protection should be enforced before new AI-specific laws are written, while 41% want new laws now.
5. Consumer-focused antitrust has broad support. 76% support applying the consumer welfare standard in antitrust enforcement and 7% oppose it. 90% agree antitrust laws should be written and enforced equally on all companies.
6. Breaking up large companies should be a low priority for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Voters want the FTC to focus on stopping fraud and scams (49%) and protecting data privacy (41%). Breaking up large American companies ranked last at 15%.
7. American tech leadership matters. 80% agree the country is stronger when the world's leading technology companies are based in the United States. 35% say breaking up America's leading tech companies would hurt the U.S. in the AI race with China, compared with only 22% who say it would help.
8. Voters reject losing features to EU-style rules. 52% oppose bringing European antitrust regulations to the U.S. if it meant losing access to convenient features they use today, and only 27% support it.
9. Support for data centers rises with information. Support for a data center planned in voters' own county rises from 33% to 44% after they hear more about data centers, and opposition falls from 58% to 48%. 54% agree that keeping data center development growing is key to American national security after being told data centers power hospitals, companies and the military, and 48% say they would be more likely to support new data center investment after learning that major tech companies have committed to pay for the electricity and grid upgrades their facilities require.
DoorDash started out delivering restaurant meals in 2013. Now it’s competing to deliver sweaters and sneakers, while Uber Eats adds Foot Locker and nationwide Costco delivery. Companies built for one lane are crossing into another to win customers.
That’s what a competitive market looks like. ⏬
Aldi plans to open more than 180 new U.S. stores in 2026, on its way to 3,200 by 2028, expanding straight into Dollar General’s rural territory. Walmart, with a store within 10 miles of 90% of Americans, keeps undercutting on price.
That’s competition at play. buff.ly/scAzzQl
CA’s AB 56 would force social media sites to show unskippable, state-scripted warnings covering up to 75% of the screen for up to 30 seconds, & again every hour after three hours online. NetChoice sued this attempt as compelled speech, & a federal court already blocked CO’s nearly identical law.
buff.ly/OcSLmeA
A memo from Echelon Insights analyzing the results is available HERE: netchoice.org/wp-content/upl…
New Albany, OH, has attracted 40 data centers since 2010, & the revenue has helped its school district avoid going to the ballot for funding. Also in OH, Amazon committed more than $15 million annually to Marysville schools for 15 years. Data centers are paying for the services residents use every day.
buff.ly/RRR793F
IL’s new Social Media User Tax charges platforms by how many Illinoisans they reach, exempting anything under 100,000 users. SCOTUS has said the government can’t tax one category of speaker more heavily than another. NetChoice recently sued to stop it, the same blueprint we’re also challenging in NetChoice v. Chicago. buff.ly/bs9AuoO
A parent paying a bill, a kid submitting an assignment, a text to confirm dinner plans. Virtually none of it happens without a data center working behind the scenes. Americans used a record 132 trillion megabytes of wireless data in 2024, and data centers helped facilitate it. buff.ly/IzV4TY5
A typical 400-MW data center in KY would generate $290 million to $435 million in city and county tax revenue over 12 years, including up to $222 million for local school districts. That’s a solid tax base that can fund schools while enabling property tax cuts. buff.ly/WPvAHqt
Amazon’s AI-powered Package Decision Engine analyzes product dimensions, fragility, & customer feedback to pick the best packaging for millions of items. It has helped eliminate over 2 million tons of unnecessary packaging waste globally, without any government mandate to do so. buff.ly/pRrSyyw
Personalized attention used to be reserved for students with private tutors or small classes. A U.S. Dept. of Education report found that AI can flag where a student is struggling in real time & adjust, simplifying a reading passage or offering harder problems, in any classroom. buff.ly/E7mELCV
Families aren’t in a hurry to pay the first price they see. In NRF’s most recent full survey of back-to-school shoppers, 86% still had at least half their list left in early July, and 45% said they were deliberately waiting for better deals.
Learn more below ⏬️ buff.ly/qVUVXe9
Parents and policymakers want better digital experiences for young people. NetChoice’s Digital Safety Shield offers federal and state lawmakers solutions that work while still respecting Americans’ rights. buff.ly/kiAlYbG
Autonomous vehicles don’t drink, text, or fall asleep at the wheel.
In 2023, 12,429 people died in alcohol-impaired-driving crashes on American roads, close to a third of all traffic deaths, and thousands more died because a driver was distracted or too tired. buff.ly/f2iBtLY
Customers are happy with drone delivery.
A DroneUp survey found a Net Promoter Score of 70, with more than 90% giving positive marks on safe arrival and timely delivery, and over a third adding extra items to their carts once they knew a drone was an option. buff.ly/rEB6oE1
NetChoice retweeted
There’s so much to unpack here.
The *entire* New Mexico economy (in 2025) is ~$125bn. The *entire* state budget is only ~$11bn.
So, these penalties would be roughly a fifth of the state’s economy and more than *double* the fiscal budget for 2026.
Ludicrous. It’s reminiscent of Europe’s targeting of American tech firms. Except this actually exceeds any judgment under the DSA or DMA. If we criticize Europe for being anti-tech (we do and we should), New Mexico deserves at least the same ire.
“But Meta is a big company, they can afford it.” Sure, okay. If they’re forced to maybe they can afford this. But no company can afford being perpetually hammered by nonsense penalties. If NM can secure 25bn, what can CA, TX, FL collect with their significantly larger populations?
And this is far from hypothetical. States have started eyeing tech for these sort of judgments in recent years. And I’d be shocked if others aren’t watching this thinking they can line their coffers with similar suits.
If so, we can kiss our tech and innovation dominance goodbye. AI supremacy? Energy innovation and infrastructure build out? Good luck.
But that’s *just* the financial and policy absurdity.
If you dig deeper, this litigation is riddled with First Amendment problems—as @TraceTheLaw explained, the majority of this case and the penalties centered around Meta’s alleged misstatements around how it moderates content.
The Supreme Court made clear that states cannot meddle with content moderation decisions. Those choices are protected by the First Amendment. See Moody v. @NetChoice.
And the government cannot do indirectly what it cannot do directly. See @NRA v. Vullo.
But that’s exactly what NM’s case does. They’re trying to get at content through the back door, pretending they can evade the First Amendment.
It’s egregious. And I’m looking forward to Meta’s appeal.
Breaking News: Meta must pay $25 billion, one of the largest penalties levied against the tech giant, for deceiving users about data privacy. nyti.ms/4yvv5yZ
On election night next month, CNN & CNBC viewers may see prediction market odds next to the vote count, since both networks now carry Kalshi data. These markets have gone mainstream, & federal courts are split on who regulates them.
Prediction markets need one rulebook. 📝 buff.ly/6bj9tFA
🚨 California Threatens Free Speech Yet Again: NetChoice Sues to Stop Unskippable Government Warnings on Social Media
LOS ANGELES, Calif.—NetChoice sued California yesterday to stop the government's latest attack on websites that display fully protected speech. AB 56 is a law that will force websites to put up state-scripted "warning" messages discouraging Californians from using online services and promoting the government's controversial views on social media. This is compelled speech, a direct violation of the First Amendment.
"The First Amendment is not a suggestion,” said @Paul_Taske, Director of the NetChoice Litigation Center. “California cannot force a private website to act as a mouthpiece for its preferred message. The State is free to speak for itself, but the Constitution forbids it from forcing others to speak for it. A federal court already blocked Colorado's nearly identical law, and there is no First Amendment exception for California.”
WHY CALIFORNIANS SHOULD CARE:
1. The warnings take up as much as 75% of the screen for up to 30 seconds, cannot be skipped, and come back up every hour after three hours online, no matter how many times users have seen them.
2. An unconstitutional law protects no one, and in this case, it actively undermines the public's access to diverse perspectives and information.
3. California is exploiting legitimate concerns about mental health to justify its attacks on speech services.
4. Politicians are using "public health" as a backdoor way to control online speech. States cannot do by "warning label" what they are unable to do by outright ban. A federal court already blocked Colorado's nearly identical law on First Amendment grounds, and California's should fall too.
5. California doesn't trust adults to make their own choices, or parents to make decisions for their own families. Unless a site has verified a user is over 17, everyone gets the warning.
Find case resources for NetChoice v. Bonta (2026) HERE: buff.ly/UIM75W4







