A California showdown with national implications: From the Politics Desk

Welcome to From the Politics Desk, a daily newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team’s latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail.

In today’s edition, we take a look at where the billionaire tax campaign in California stands and what it signals about the Democratic Party’s direction. Plus, Andrea Mitchell examines President Donald Trump’s efforts to reassure a skeptical public on AI.

— Adam Wollner

A California showdown with national implications

By Adam Wollner and Adam Edelman

California Democrats avoided what would have been a brutal and costly intraparty fight for governor when progressive activist Tom Steyer finished third in the all-party primary this summer, leaving former Health Secretary Xavier Becerra as the clear favorite in a one-on-one November matchup against Republican Steve Hilton.

But there’s a battle brewing further down the ballot that could have even broader implications for the party, both in the state and nationally.

Voters in California will decide this fall whether to implement a one-time 5% tax on the state’s billionaires. Listed as “Proposition 40,” the ballot measure is shaping up as one of the most expensive campaigns in the country this year, with roughly $100 million already spent or booked on ads through Election Day, according to AdImpact. Tech leaders in Silicon Valley, most notably Google co-founder Sergey Brin, have aggressively lined up against the billionaire tax, which was pushed by SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.

As we’ve reported, the proposal emerged as a major fault line for Democrats in the state’s race for governor and in the not-so-invisible 2028 presidential primary. Becerra and term-limited Gov. Gavin Newsom are against it, while Steyer and Rep. Ro Khanna are for it.

Meanwhile, a slew of other prominent California Democrats — including former Vice President Kamala Harris, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla — have not taken firm public stances on the ballot measure.

A new poll out today underscores why the party is scattered on the issue. According to a NBCUniversal Local/Telemundo Station Group survey, 48% of likely California voters back the billionaire tax, while 38% oppose it and 14% are undecided. While it’s certainly a more promising result for proponents of the measure than opponents, it still falls short of majority support.

Among Democrats, however, 67% said they will vote for the proposal and 19% said they will vote against it.One of the arguments from the anti-billionaire-tax side is that wealthy Californians will flee the state. The poll showed that 59% of respondents said they were not concerned about that potential outcome, compared to 41% who said they were concerned.

Passage of a first-of-its-kind billionaire tax would be a major shot in the arm for progressives heading into the 2028 campaign. While deep-blue California is not necessarily representative of the entire nation, a victory would further highlight the populist streak running through the party’s base and the electorate at large. A national NBC News poll earlier this month asked registered voters whether 15 different attributes would make them more or less likely to support a candidate. The most popular? Raising taxes on billionaires.

That’s the sort of energy potential White House contenders like Khanna are hoping to tap into: He’s set to team up with Sen. Bernie Sanders for rallies in San Francisco and Los Angeles in the coming days in support of the wealth tax.

Trump has a new name for AI — but not regulations

Analysis by Andrea Mitchell

The world’s tech leaders — 21 men and one woman — were out in full force for a White House lunch with President Donald Trump Tuesday.

Their cumulative wealth? Hard to estimate. Their promise to voluntarily regulate artificial intelligence? Perhaps equally so.

To try to reassure a skittish public about the safety of the biggest technological transformation since the internet, Trump, a master of rebranding, signed an executive order requiring all federal agencies to rename AI as “superintelligence,” or “SI.”

For Subscribers

FOR SUBSCRIBERSA harrowing ordeal aboard an Israel-bound plane

FOR SUBSCRIBERSOpenAI CEO Sam Altman to skip congressional hearing on rogue AI agents

FOR SUBSCRIBERSKey DOJ lawyers departed Trump ‘grand conspiracy’ probe amid pressure to produce, source says

FOR SUBSCRIBERSTrump’s new AI chatbot often links to a site launched under Clinton 26 years ago

FOR SUBSCRIBERSAt MAHA summit, industry CEOs the movement once vilified take the stage

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThis Paralympian has two goals: Win medals and give away $500,000 to her teammates

FOR SUBSCRIBERSCornell rape allegation spotlights stringent New York state laws that have long drawn criticism

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe debate over AI’s future rages on both coasts

FOR SUBSCRIBERSDecades-old march dispute reignites in Northern Ireland, threatening political crisis

FOR SUBSCRIBERSMore oil is getting out of the Middle East. Why is it still so expensive?

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe complicated bargain between ‘looksmaxxing’ influencer Clavicular and the women in his orbit

FOR SUBSCRIBERSSenators unveil bipartisan bill to deliver essential newborn supply kits to new moms

FOR SUBSCRIBERSAI agents promise to run your errands. Websites are fighting back.

FOR SUBSCRIBERSDemocrats face a staggering spending disadvantage in Georgia’s tight race for governor

FOR SUBSCRIBERSObama boosts Senate Democrats with October fundraiser

For Subscribers

FOR SUBSCRIBERSA harrowing ordeal aboard an Israel-bound plane

FOR SUBSCRIBERSOpenAI CEO Sam Altman to skip congressional hearing on rogue AI agents

FOR SUBSCRIBERSKey DOJ lawyers departed Trump ‘grand conspiracy’ probe amid pressure to produce, source says

FOR SUBSCRIBERSTrump’s new AI chatbot often links to a site launched under Clinton 26 years ago

FOR SUBSCRIBERSAt MAHA summit, industry CEOs the movement once vilified take the stage

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThis Paralympian has two goals: Win medals and give away $500,000 to her teammates

FOR SUBSCRIBERSCornell rape allegation spotlights stringent New York state laws that have long drawn criticism

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe debate over AI’s future rages on both coasts

FOR SUBSCRIBERSDecades-old march dispute reignites in Northern Ireland, threatening political crisis

FOR SUBSCRIBERSMore oil is getting out of the Middle East. Why is it still so expensive?

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe complicated bargain between ‘looksmaxxing’ influencer Clavicular and the women in his orbit

FOR SUBSCRIBERSSenators unveil bipartisan bill to deliver essential newborn supply kits to new moms

FOR SUBSCRIBERSAI agents promise to run your errands. Websites are fighting back.

FOR SUBSCRIBERSDemocrats face a staggering spending disadvantage in Georgia’s tight race for governor

FOR SUBSCRIBERSObama boosts Senate Democrats with October fundraiser

With considerable fanfare, the White House heralded a new accord to develop internal safety controls to prevent rogue agents from spinning out of control. The self-policing agreement includes risk reviews and auditing by third parties. Trump called the voluntary agreement “morally binding.” Tech journalist Kara Swisher called it a “pinky promise.”

Ironically, the White House position against any regulation came on the same day Anthropic submitted its security filing for its long-awaited IPO. It devoted almost one-third of the filing to warning investors the technology may pose “existential risks to humanity,” including that advanced AI models could manipulate, blackmail and exhibit other unpredictable behaviors.

Last April, Anthropic held back its Mythos model citing potential dangers. In July, OpenAI models hacked the Hugging Face AI startup. In September, leaders of Anthropic, OpenAI and Google DeepMind called for slowing down advanced models because of safety concerns. And last week, OpenAI revealed its tools had hacked dozens of sites, including governments, and scrapped plans to release its newest model next month.

In an interview with “Meet the Press” that aired Sunday, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates told Kristen Welker, “AI is powerful enough to drive events that cause a billion deaths,” adding, “There’s never been a weapon as powerful as the combination of people with ill intent using the latest AI tools.” Asked about voluntary regulation, he said, “No one thinks self-regulation is enough.”

In response to growing political concerns in both parties, Trump said yesterday, “I will never stifle the growth of technology that will be bigger than the industrial revolution.” During a White House summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping, the two rivals in the AI race issued a vague agreement to communicate about threats.

At the White House yesterday, competition over AI was top of mind over cooperation. Trump told the tech CEOs, “You’re going to have a winner, or you’re going to have a loser,” adding, “We’re leading now over China and everyone else, and I want to keep it that way.” That same day, Senate Democrats tried to pass legislation to regulate AI by unanimous consent, but Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, objected.

The debate has even caught the attention of the pope. Speaking to reporters yesterday, Pope Leo questioned Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang’s commitment to safety. Huang, who has called for a hands-off approach on regulation, was among the guests at the state dinner for Xi and yesterday’s White House meeting.

“He’s the same one, however, that says there should be no limits placed and no government regulation,” the pope said of Huang. He added, “I do think that the concerns raised by many of the experts, specialists in AI, should be taken seriously.”

That’s all From the Politics Desk for now. Today’s newsletter was compiled by Adam Wollner and Lauren Zola.

If you have feedback — likes or dislikes — email us at politicsnewsletter@nbcuni.com

And if you’re a fan, please share with everyone and anyone. They can sign up here.