Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Artificial intelligence can take the politics out of policymaking

artificial intellligence robot
white robot wallpaper

Pendyala is an assistant professor of applied data science at San Jose State University and is a public voices fellow of The OpEdProject.

In a recent study, 71 percent of the government leaders said that using generative artificial intelligence in their operations will result in benefits that outweigh any potential risks. Maybe we should enshrine the use of data in our founding documents.

Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” I think it is now time to append that statement with: “supported by a body of data science tools and technologies.”

Decision-making in industries, including the restaurant business, is increasingly being driven by data. Even some investment funds are now entirely automated from end to end, using data-driven decision-making. But governments are still slow to adopt data-driven methods, even for the most widely impacting policies. In democracies, legislation is still predominantly driven by vote-bank politics and popular or partisan beliefs.


While data science is not yet devoid of biases and other ethical issues that the recent presidential executive order on AI addresses, the science is still mature enough for application in governance – with reasonable checks and balances provided under the U.S. Constitution.

Last year, I submitted a grant proposal to investigate the safety of a legal right turn on red using machine learning. It was denied, even though further analysis will prove the efficacy of using of AI to investigate government programs.

For example, I asked ChatGPT: “Based on the data you have, can you tell if making private elementary school fees tax deductible will help society?” ChatGPT is trained mostly on data in the form of natural language statements available on the Internet and not on specific numbers. Still, it did a useful qualitative analysis of the impact by providing detailed and sensible arguments for and against the concept. Using quantitative data certainly is a tool for providing more specific metrics.

Data may also show how much time, energy, and effort spent in commute may have been saved, and accidents avoided, if the government incentivized employers and schools of a minimum size to run shuttles for commuters. More data can probably also quantify the money saved if the resulting climate disasters could have been avoided. We currently do not have these studies, hence we are having to rely on politics and opinions that aren’t supported by accurate data.

As AI advances, and becomes more commonplace, we need to open our mind to how it might reduce unsubstantiated electoral promises, abuse of public services, and government inefficiencies. Data will certainly help in determining if laws like California’s Proposition 47, which reduced certain low-level drug and property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors, did more bad than good to the community – not people or the popular vote.

As part of my talks at events and the class that I teach on Big Data, I explain how a Massachusetts governor’s own sensitive health information was exposed by a graduate student despite his assurances that the common man’s privacy is protected.

President Biden might have been able to avoid contributing to the rise of inflation if there was an additional check done by data-driven methods. Building prediction models using artificial intelligence based on a number of current and past features of the economy, analysts could have predicted how Biden’s proposals would affect inflation.

People’s opinions may not always be correct, but data analysis can expose latent characteristics of the situation described by the data.

Read More

Could Splits Within the GOP Over Economic Policy Hurt the Trump Administration?

With Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) by his side President Donald Trump speaks to the press following a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Tasos Katopodis

Could Splits Within the GOP Over Economic Policy Hurt the Trump Administration?

Republican U.S. Senator Josh Hawley from Missouri is an unusual combo of right and left politics—kind of like an elephant combined with a donkey combined with a polar bear. And, yet, his views may augur the future of the Republican Party.

Many people view the Republican and Democratic parties as ideological monoliths, run by hardcore partisans and implacably positioned against each other. But, in fact, both parties have their internal divisions, influenced by various outside organizations. In the GOP, an intra-party battle is brewing between an economic populist wing with its more pro-labor positions and a traditional libertarian wing with its pro-free market stances.

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: Trump’s Middle East Trip

U.S. President Donald J. Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman a signing ceremony at the Saudi Royal Court on May 13, 2025, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Getty Images, Win McNamee

Just the Facts: Trump’s Middle East Trip

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

Are pro-Israel supporters of Donald Trump concerned about his recent trip to the Middle East?

Keep ReadingShow less
Man looking at stocks on his phone. Stock market.

As Trump pushes disruption, the markets push back.

Getty Images, Alistair Berg

The Markets Strike Back: Why Trump’s Economic Fantasies Keep Crashing into Reality

Trump may have won the election, but he’s losing the markets. In just 100 days, Wall Street has erased nearly $6 trillion in global equity value, according to Bloomberg data cited in The Guardian. The S&P 500 has logged one of its worst openings to a presidential term since the Nixon years. And fund managers—the real-world referees of economic confidence—are sending a message Congress seems unwilling to deliver: enough.

While Trump’s second term has been marked by a tsunami of executive orders, tariff threats, and regulatory purges, the financial markets are refusing to play along. From panicked sell-offs to jittery consumer sentiment and retreating business investment, U.S. capital is staging its own quiet rebellion. Consumer confidence has dropped to its lowest level since 2020, with Americans’ outlook on jobs, income, and business conditions sinking to a 13-year low, according to The Conference Board.

Keep ReadingShow less
Business professional watching stocks go down.
Getty Images, Bartolome Ozonas

The White House Is Booming, the Boardroom Is Panicking

The Confidence Collapse

Consumer confidence is plummeting—and that was before the latest Wall Street selloffs.

Keep ReadingShow less