Billionaires Spend Big to Shape AI and Ballot Rules

The five largest AI-data-center companies, including Amazon and Google, were on track to spend $900 billion on AI in 2026. The build-out could anchor President Donald Trump’s claims about the economy, while companies and wealthy donors retain control over ownership and political rules.

Who Owns the Machine’s Lessons

The Atlantic’s Matteo Wong reported that the five companies planned to spend roughly as much as they had spent in the previous three years combined. Two AI chipmakers accounted for one-third of corporate-profit growth in the previous quarter, and AI stocks made up nearly half of the S&P 500’s growth by September. Depending on the measure, AI investment could already represent more than 8% of U.S. gross domestic product.

At recent rallies, Trump said, “I had the greatest economy in the history of our country in my first term,” and, “This term is going to blow it away.” Wong wrote that the claim rested largely on the AI infrastructure build-out, even as gas and grocery prices rose, wages stayed flat or fell, housing remained difficult and job growth slowed. Unemployment was low, but many people weren’t seeking work. AI spending had also begun to frighten investors and contributed to a recent market tumble.

Fortune commentator Gordon Ritter argued that companies are setting rules over ownership of human work in AI systems by default. He calls the corrections, judgments, reasoning and workarounds people leave behind “traces,” which companies treat as valuable assets. Ritter compared the contest to broadcasters claiming radio frequencies before Congress passed the Radio Act of 1927 and the Communications Act of 1934 later ratified control.

Ritter proposed a “social contract” with choice at the platform level, sovereignty at the organizational level and appreciation at the individual level. He argued that no single AI model should become unavoidable infrastructure and that organizations should own the workflows and expertise they build on top of AI. Workers whose judgment trains AI, he said, should be treated as co-authors, not raw material.

His proposed “cognitive passport” would capture a person’s problem-solving patterns without carrying confidential documents, deals or processes. In his example, an employee’s habit of asking a buyer about the previous quarter would belong to the employee, while the company’s 18% discount floor would not. The system holding the data would generate the passport, the employer would review it for confidentiality, and a future employer would assess it. There’s no common format yet to make such a passport meaningful from one company to another.

A Billionaire-Funded Ballot Fight

Sergey Brin contributed $102 million to Building a Better California, a group central to Silicon Valley billionaires’ efforts to influence state policy. Through Oct. 20, the group had spent more than $304 million opposing Proposition 40 and supporting Propositions 41 and 42, according to Capital & Main.

Proposition 40, on the Nov. 3 ballot, would impose a 5% tax on assets worth more than $1 billion owned by certain individuals and trusts whose owners were California residents on Jan. 1, 2026. The measure would direct 90% of proceeds to health care and 10% to education and food assistance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimated California would probably collect tens of billions of dollars over several years.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office also said Proposition 41 or Proposition 42 could block the wealth tax if either received more “yes” votes than Proposition 40, even if most voters approved Proposition 40. Proposition 41 would limit the state’s ability to exempt new taxes from its spending limit and require audits of programs funded by new special taxes. Proposition 42 would prohibit retroactive taxation.

A Politico analysis said more than 70 current and former California billionaires had directed a record $612 million to state elections during the 2026 cycle. At least 30 billionaires had contributed more than $293 million specifically to the wealth-tax fight. The Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West sponsored Proposition 40, arguing that California needed funds to protect health care as federal cuts threatened residents’ coverage. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) also supported it.

Bloomberg estimated Brin’s fortune at $231 billion. In an April interview with The New York Times, he compared Proposition 40 to the socialism he experienced growing up in the Soviet Union and said he didn’t want California to end up in the same place. He moved to Nevada in December before the Jan. 1 residency cutoff. The measure’s sponsors are asking voters to tax billionaire wealth; billionaire donors are spending heavily to shape the ballot environment around it.

The Boom’s Other Winners

The financial machinery behind the build-out is expanding, too. Business Insider’s 10th annual Rising Stars of Wall Street feature highlighted 25 U.S.-based finance professionals aged 35 or younger, selected by editors from nominations by bosses, colleagues, recruiters and other industry insiders. The article described record AI fundraising and professionals financing data centers and investing in AI companies.

Maya Venkatraman of Morgan Stanley helped structure a $3.2 billion TeraWulf data-center bond with Google credit support. Diana Liu of Blue Owl Capital helped develop financing for Meta’s $50 billion Hyperion data center in Louisiana; Blue Owl financed 80% and Meta 20%, and the deal raised more than $27 billion. The five largest AI-data-center companies were set to spend $900 billion, while financiers and technology companies arranged the borrowing and infrastructure deals that put that spending to work.