of Americans have little or no confidence in the U.S. government to regulate AI effectively.
Pew Research Center, 2026Independent civic accountability project
Is America's AI leadership earning the public's trust?
The White House has made winning the AI race a national priority. Public confidence should be treated as part of the mission—not a side effect.
01
What Americans report
The trust gap is real.
say the increased use of AI in daily life makes them more concerned than excited.
Pew Research Center, 2025report using AI at least sometimes, despite near-universal awareness of the technology.
Gallup–SCSP survey, 2025These surveys measure national sentiment, not the performance of any single official. They establish the public-confidence problem that federal AI leadership must address.
02
The documented mandate
The public record, plainly stated.
JAN 2025
A new White House role
The White House described David Sacks as its first AI and crypto czar, placing him at the center of the administration's technology agenda.
White House press briefingJUL 2025
An action plan with 90+ policies
The administration organized its AI plan around innovation, infrastructure, and international diplomacy and security.
White House AI Action Plan releaseJUN 2026
Confidence remains limited
Pew found broad concern about government effectiveness and corporate responsibility in AI, including skepticism across party lines.
Pew national survey03
A proposed standard
Five tests for accountable AI leadership.
Understanding
Publish recurring measures of what Americans know, use, and misunderstand about AI.
Can progress be measured?Control
Make consent, disclosure, appeal, and human alternatives visible in high-impact AI systems.
Can people say no?Opportunity
Report whether workers and small businesses are receiving usable training and broadly shared productivity gains.
Who benefits?Safety
Disclose incidents, safeguards, independent evaluations, and corrective action in plain language.
What happens when AI fails?Results
Connect federal announcements to dates, owners, outcomes, costs, and publicly reviewable evidence.
What actually shipped?How this project works
Evidence first. Conclusions second.
Every factual claim should link to an original government document, a named survey with published methodology, or another inspectable primary record. Commentary is labeled. Corrections should be made visibly.
01
No anonymous allegations.
02
No claims about motive without evidence.
03
No personal information or harassment.
04
Original sources over partisan summaries.
04
Read it yourself