At the World Governments Summit in Dubai on February 12, 2025, Oracle Executive Chairman Larry Ellison introduced a bold idea—creating a centralized national database for U.S. citizens. His proposal aims to enhance artificial intelligence (AI)-driven decision-making in fields like healthcare, national security, and governance. While Ellison envisions this system as a way to enhance efficiency and security, the concept raises significant ethical and privacy concerns.

The rapid advancement of AI has brought new opportunities and challenges for governments and businesses worldwide. As machine learning and automation become integral to public services, policymakers are struggling to determine the best way to manage, secure, and utilize data. Ellison believes that a unified database would allow AI to process structured information more effectively, leading to faster and more accurate decision-making for critical services.

Speaking via video at the summit, Ellison stressed that fragmented data weakens efficiency. According to him, consolidating national data into a single secure platform would enhance AI’s ability to make real-time decisions. He argued that this could revolutionize fields like healthcare—improving diagnostics and treatment plans—and law enforcement, where AI could help predict and prevent crimes more effectively.

While his proposal excited some members of the summit, it also sparked concerns. Former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair, known for advocating digital governance, was present at the discussion, signaling broader interest in AI’s role in modernization. However, Blair did not explicitly endorse the idea, and many experts remain cautious about the implications of such a system.

Critics argue that merging all national data into one repository could lead to government overreach and privacy dangers. A centralized database, no matter how secure, would remain a high-value target for cyberattacks. Privacy advocates warn of potential misuse of personal data, government surveillance, and ethical dilemmas stemming from excessive data control. As one expert put it, “Data security isn’t just a technical issue—it’s a fundamental human rights concern.”

Ellison’s company, Oracle, has significant experience managing government data. It has been at the forefront of AI-driven healthcare initiatives, helping hospitals and agencies predict disease patterns and improve patient care. Given Oracle’s expertise, Ellison presents this idea not as a distant vision but as a natural step in AI’s evolution. However, many remain unconvinced that any organization, private or governmental, should control a vast national database of personal information.

The idea of a unified AI-powered national database is both ambitious and controversial. While the potential benefits—such as improved healthcare analysis and enhanced national security—are compelling, valid concerns remain about privacy, cybersecurity, and regulatory oversight. Striking a balance between innovation and ethical responsibility will be crucial if such an initiative is ever to be realized.

As AI continues to shape the future of governance, discussions on data security and privacy will remain at the forefront of policymaking. Ellison’s proposal may or may not move forward, but it has undeniably amplified the conversation on how AI and data should be integrated into government operations. The debate over the balance between efficiency and personal privacy is far from over.