Let's discuss the two radical left-wing lawmakers behind the "Ban on Artificial Superintelligence Act," which has caused today's market collapse, and examine whether their past radical proposals have ultimately gained consensus within the Democratic Party. In the US Congressional debate on artificial intelligence, the "Ban on Artificial Superintelligence Act" is one of the few proposals attempting to curb the most extreme risks at their source. It was jointly introduced in September 2026 by Vermont Independent Senator Bernie Sanders and Texas Democratic Representative Greg Casal, advocating a ban on the development of superintelligent systems that could surpass human control until a dedicated federal agency is established. The bill broadly defines such systems as technologies that reach or exceed human levels in most intellectual tasks, or possess the ability to overthrow the government or refuse to shut down commands, and sets extremely high computational thresholds. Sanders is the longest-serving independent member of Congress in history, consistently voting alongside Democrats. A self-proclaimed democratic socialist, his political career began as mayor of Burlington, progressing through the House of Representatives and then to the Senate, consistently focusing on economic inequality, worker rights, and the power of large corporations. Casal, a full-fledged Democrat, was elected chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus in late 2024, becoming one of the caucus's youngest leaders in recent years. A former Austin labor organizer, he focused on the cost of living, utility monopolies, and the impact of technology on employment after entering Congress, adopting a more economically populist approach than traditional cultural issues. Both candidates are on the left wing within their parties, but their paths diverge. Sanders' core proposals, repeatedly pushed for over decades, include Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, significantly raising the minimum wage, free public college, and a wealth tax. These initiatives garnered substantial grassroots support in the 2016 and 2020 presidential primaries, forcing other candidates to respond. Casall's recent focus has included a "new affordability agenda," taxing large AI companies to help the unemployed re-enter the workforce, and banning the use of algorithms and data to differentiate pricing for individuals. His collaboration with Sanders on a super-smart ban extends this economic and regulatory logic to the technological frontier. Have these proposals ultimately become a Democratic consensus? The answer is no. 1) Universal healthcare still lacks a majority support from the Democratic caucuses; 2) A full version of the Green New Deal has not become part of the party platform. Sanders himself publicly acknowledged in 2025 that universal healthcare still lacks sufficient votes within the party. Casall's push for an AI tax and a supersmart ban similarly only garnered support from progressive lawmakers. Mainstream Democrats favored regulation, transparency requirements, and environmental impact assessments for data centers, rather than a blanket ban. Meanwhile, centrists and moderates within the Democratic Party remain concerned that excessive restrictions would weaken America's position in the technological competition and are also hesitant about political donations from the tech industry. The progressive wing has indeed changed the boundaries of the Democratic Party's discourse. Issues such as higher minimum wages, climate investment, student debt relief, and drug price negotiations have gone from the margins to policies acceptable to a majority within the party over the past decade. However, the most radical versions—permanent bans, a single payer completely replacing private insurance, or nuclear-level controls on specific technologies—remain on the left-wing agenda. The Democratic Party is a big tent party; while the progressive caucus is large, it needs to negotiate with more centrist lawmakers to advance legislation. In summary, the "Ban on Artificial Superintelligence Act" remains a flagship proposal of the progressive wing, rather than a unified party stance. Whether it can make substantial progress after the Democrats gain control of Congress depends on the balance of power between the left and the center within the party, particularly the attitudes of the Democratic centrists and moderates. Therefore, as mentioned earlier, this bill is unlikely to become a consensus within the Democratic Party. Personally, I think its widespread dissemination today is somewhat deliberate. This post is sponsored by @bitget_zh, "Bitget Buys US Stocks: Instant Entry, Smooth Trading"