Tracking the AI Economy: Seven Charts Every Presidential Candidate Should Study

The next president will need a day one strategy for addressing the economic opportunity and political risk of a raging artificial intelligence debate. Today, much of the AI policy debate centers on how to regulate AI technologies and mitigate negative impacts on workers, including future job losses. These are important debates that will continue in the run-up to the 2028 election.

However, once elected, presidents are rarely measured by their policy or regulatory frameworks. They are measured (fairly or unfairly) by the state of the economy—including how many jobs they create, and the affordability of basic goods and services, during a four (or eight) year term. As such, it is critically important for the next president to harness the unprecedented levels of private sector investment pouring into AI today to build an economy that works for more people, creating more opportunity in more places.

To do that, the next presidential administration must rethink the way that it deploys capital, shapes technology and financial markets, and perhaps most importantly rebuilds government capacity.

The charts below are meant to ground that governing agenda in data, rather than rhetoric. Together, they tell the story of where AI investment is concentrating, who is capturing its gains, and where geographic, political, and talent gaps are already widening. Presidential candidates who internalize and act on this data will define the next era of the American economy.

Why this matters: Where and how you build scientific and physical infrastructure matters. Contrary to popular belief, much of AI investment is taking place outside of Silicon Valley through an ever-growing network of data center campuses, often referred to as AI Factories. In past technology and industrial revolutions, the design and placement of these projects directly impacted the trajectory of local communities. The location of highway exits, railroad spurs, U.S. Department of Energy National Labs, and NASA launch sites led to the clustering of innovation workers, supply chains, and housing across America’s history.

However, historically these investments have left people behind, whether it was highways historically segregating communities or the “China Shock” hollowing out manufacturing jobs and factory towns across the Northeast and Midwest. We are building the AI equivalent of the “highway system” today and the next presidential administration will play a meaningful role in shaping these infrastructure investments.

Why this matters: Data center buildouts are becoming increasingly contentious as they expand into more communities, straining local water and energy resources, while economic data shows their job creation benefits fade after initial project construction. As moratoriums spread across the country, politicians are being pushed into a false binary: pro- or anti-moratorium.

The next presidential administration will need to balance these legitimate local concerns against a competing reality: AI infrastructure and its supply chain are both a job creator (particularly for skilled-trades workers building these projects, jobs that don’t require a college degree for well-paying work) and a national security imperative. However, short-term jobs should not be an end goal in itself, long-term economic development strategies must be the north star vision.

Why this matters: There may be opportunities to transform disconnected data center islands into inclusive AI Hubs through intentional federal and local policies. Winning the support of “AI undecideds” is dependent on how these projects are designed and whether they fit into the longer-term economic development vision for a region and the ambitions of its residents. But neither the vision nor the strategy behind it can come from the private sector alone.

Why this matters: The fastest growing technology in modern history has the potential to transform local communities if there is an intentional government approach to how we structure our portfolio of scientific, infrastructure, and workforce investments, alongside streamlined project approvals and market shaping activities.

The what, where, and how we build is not a foregone conclusion, or one that will be dictated by the private sector alone.

Why this matters: The way that the government designs industrial and technology interventions matters and you need the right staff and staff structures in places to do that.

Why this matters: DOGE cuts, agency restructurings, and fewer employees with PhDs means that there is less capacity to innovate and implement. Our government is less expert today, especially in emerging technologies like AI and quantum and surrounding regulatory infrastructure (e.g. EPA, FERC). This will be a recruitment challenge and morale challenge for the next president.

Why this matters: A future government without an AI, jobs, and innovation agenda will be caught flat-footed. But, a forward-looking strategy developed today can transform this risk into a job creating opportunity.

In future pieces, we will lay out implementation strategies for how the next presidential administration should approach this moment to ensure that the forthcoming AI revolution is one that works for workers, regions, and communities that past technological waves left behind.