We recently fact-checked the Democratic National Committee's 192-page post-election report, Build to Win. Build to Last. We pulled all 142 claims its own reviewers had flagged as unsourced, checked them against public records, and sourced 44 the party said couldn't be verified.

The report uses the word "data" 405 times, "analytics" 16 times, and "technology" 25 times across roughly 55,700 words. It describes the party's voter database in detail. Yet the 192-page report, released in 2026, contains no mention of "artificial intelligence," "machine learning," "automation," or "AI."

Democrats need a plan for AI: how to use it in campaigns, how to verify its output, and how to address its risks. These are Civly's priorities.

1. Put the productivity research to work

A randomized controlled trial published in Science found workers given AI assistance finished professional writing tasks 40% faster with 18% higher quality. An NBER study of more than 5,000 customer-support agents found AI lifted productivity 14% on average, and 34% for the least-experienced workers, narrowing the gap between new hires and veterans. Software developers with an AI assistant completed tasks 55.8% faster. And PwC, analyzing nearly a billion job postings, found workers with AI skills now command a 56% wage premium, with productivity growth in AI-exposed industries rising roughly fourfold.

Campaigns and committees can use these tools to speed up research, improve targeting, and respond to news sooner. Democrats should be testing those uses and training staff to evaluate the results.

2. Check every claim

AI can produce fluent prose containing invented quotes or statistics. In political research, publishing those errors can damage a campaign's credibility and expose it to legal claims.

Civly checks its research through three steps:

3. Address public concerns

According to Pew Research Center, half of U.S. adults now say the growing use of AI in daily life makes them more concerned than excited, up from 37% in 2021. Most say they have too little control over how AI appears in their lives and want more control. Only about a quarter think it will improve how people do their jobs.

Democrats should take those concerns seriously as they test where AI helps, where it fails, and where restrictions are needed.

The party's commitment to science should include evaluating AI on the evidence and setting standards for its use.

4. Protect children using AI products

Children and teenagers face particular risks. A 2025 Common Sense Media survey found 72% of U.S. teens have used an AI companion, and more than half use one regularly, with roughly one in three saying conversations with a chatbot are as satisfying as, or more satisfying than, talking to a real friend. The American Psychological Association warned in a June 2025 health advisory that adolescents' relationship with AI "may displace or interfere with development of healthy, real-world relationships."

A wrongful-death lawsuit over a 14-year-old's suicide is now in federal court, and the FTC has opened an inquiry into seven chatbot companies over their risks to minors.

Civly supports regulation of AI, especially protections for children. California enacted AI-companion-chatbot safeguards in SB 243, effective January 2026. The EU AI Act bans systems that exploit people's vulnerabilities because of their age.

Our commitment

We commit to sourcing factual claims, having people review AI output, and disclosing how we use it. That includes acknowledging errors and addressing harm.

"The standard is the standard — you get better or you get worse, you never stay the same."

Curt Cignetti, Indiana Football

We want the Democratic Party to make the same commitments and include AI in its plans for future campaigns.

Civly CEO Dr. Dan Barkhuff is available for comment on AI and politics.

How this piece was made: This article was drafted with AI assistance and reviewed by a human. The statistics link to the sources used in that review.

Sources

  • DNC report text analysis (word counts): Civly fact-check of Build to Win. Build to Last. (2026). democrats.org
  • Noy & Zhang, "Productivity Effects of Generative AI," Science (2023). science.org
  • Brynjolfsson, Li & Raymond, "Generative AI at Work," NBER (2023). nber.org
  • Peng et al., "Impact of AI on Developer Productivity" (GitHub Copilot), arXiv (2023). arxiv.org
  • PwC, "2025 Global AI Jobs Barometer". pwc.com
  • Pew Research Center, "Key findings about how Americans view AI" (2026). pewresearch.org
  • Common Sense Media, "Talk, Trust, and Trade-Offs: How and Why Teens Use AI Companions" (2025). commonsensemedia.org
  • American Psychological Association, "Health Advisory on AI and Adolescent Well-being" (June 2025). apa.org
  • Garcia v. Character Technologies (M.D. Fla., 2024). techjusticelaw.org
  • FTC, "Inquiry into AI Chatbots Acting as Companions" (Sept. 2025). ftc.gov
  • EU AI Act, Article 5 (prohibited practices). artificialintelligenceact.eu

Press Contact

Jordyn Geruso

Chief Operations Officer

[email protected]  |  civly.ai