Making AI Work for the People: Penn Washington Staff Reflection from Georgetown’s Tech & Society Week

On March 25th, I attended the “Making AI Work for the People” panel hosted by Georgetown University’s Initiative on Artificial Intelligence and Democratic Citizenship (AIDC) and the Georgetown Democracy Initiative. The recent discourse from many universities about technology and ethics and governance were front and center at the popular Tech & Society week.

I walked into the auditorium with a simple question: how can we move from theoretical discussions on artificial intelligence and governance to practical, actionable steps in Washington, D.C.? And of course, how can Penn’s scholarship meaningfully enter that conversation? 

As a starting point, I found the framing of “make AI work for the people” reminiscent of John F. Kennedy’s famous call to action, “Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country…”—and Benjamin Franklin’s reminder: “A republic, if you can keep it.” Democracy is not a byproduct of a self-operating system. It requires active citizen participation, and AI does not operate outside of that responsibility. 

This principle became evident during the panel. Panelist Gabriela Ramos, former Assistant Director-General for Social and Human Sciences, UNESCO said: “This is really a problem for the world…this narrative that regulation is a bad word is completely false. Non regulating is a regulatory decision. And you don’t wait…for governments to come in a say, sorry, where was this?” Although the speakers drew from international policy experience, the discussion consistently returned to core governance principles that apply across both domestic and global contexts. 

From there, the conversation turned to accountability: when AI systems cause harm, concentrate power, or distort public debate, communities will ask who bears responsibility and how institutions enforce transparency and oversight. The discussion brought me back to a class I participated in at Stanford University as part of the Fall 2025 Social Sector Cohort on human-centered AI. A professor used Waymo as an example: if you were in a car accident, would you feel comfortable getting back into a self-driving vehicle? Most people instinctively say no, they would trust a human driver more. Yet, in many cases, the algorithm performs better. The gap is not just about performance; it is about trust. Who do I hold responsible if my self-driving vehicle veers off the road? 

This is where the conversation moves from theory to practice. 

From a Penn perspective, this emphasis on governance and democratic durability connects directly back to work already underway across the University. Penn researchers have convened cross-sector conversations on AI governance that explicitly link research to policy engagement—precisely the bridge that Washington needs when technology moves faster than formal rule making. Penn’s work on machine learning in government has also emphasized the combined technical, legal, ethical, and political challenges of deploying these systems in public institutions. And Penn’s scholarship on misinformation and the information environment continues to build evidence about how false or misleading claims spread, and how targeted “mental model” explanations can reduce susceptibility to certain types of misinformation. 

Key Takeaway:

Build capacity inside democratic institutions, invest in independent research, and meet governance with what Penn does best—interdisciplinary evidence that holds up under scrutiny.  

We can build remarkable tools and still fail the public if we do not align incentives, governance, and trust. The risk does not announce itself all at once. Often, risk only becomes visible after harm spreads. That is exactly where universities like Penn can help: we can look beyond the short-term cycle, surface under examined dynamics early, and convene people who do not usually share the same room. 

If we want technology to serve the public, we need more places where evidence meets practice—and where partnership, not polarization, drives the work.  

As Benjamin Franklin reminds us, “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.” 

If you’re interested in how evidence can strengthen democratic practice, we invite you to explore Penn Washington’s domestic policy portfolio, The Franklin Initiative. Our programs connect research to real-world governance challenges.