Well, I'm told the states Washington, California, New York, and New Jersey all have laws that limit what such clauses can require, but they probably only protect employees who report crimes, sexual harassment, and that sort of thing, which probably isn't that helpful in the AI alignment field, since I figure most of the risk in that area would come from companies developing AIs which are extremely powerful, but still (for now) legal to develop.
You may be interested in Superabundance by Marian Tupy and Gale Pooley. I haven't actually finished it, myself, but from what I've read so far they seem to argue that a greater population (which is a likely effect of poverty reduction) will, counterintuitively, increase wealth and prosperity since we'll have more workers, scientists, and inventors. I should mention, though, that it's published by a politically-conservative American think tank, so it may be somewhat biased in favor of limited government and against birth control.
I think you're wise to point out the potential risk of increasing the effectiveness of changing others' beliefs. Like any technology or technique, when we consider whether to contribute to its development, we have to consider both the potential harm it could do in the wrong hands and the potential good it could do in the right ones. I'm not sure enough people in the education and debiasing communities realize that.