Source: SiliconANGLE
The proposal moves Washington from regulatory oversight toward direct financial participation in AI outcomes, using Cold War–era DARPA models as template but at venture scale. It immediately creates conflicts: government would be shareholder, regulator, and national security arbiter simultaneously—a structure that worked for semiconductors partly through obscurity but will face constant public scrutiny in AI. The binding constraint isn't legality but whether Treasury can acquire meaningful positions before valuations lock in, and whether companies will accept government board seats as a condition of capital access during a potential funding slowdown.