This week in Washington, renewed efforts to limit states’ authority over artificial intelligence (AI) have elicited strong bipartisan reactions. The push for federal control over AI regulation is reminiscent of prior attempts, uniting diverse groups against a common concern regarding dwindling state powers.
Bipartisan Backlash Over Federal AI Control
Key legislators and activists from both ends of the political spectrum have voiced their opposition. New York Assembly Member Alex Bores commented on the situation, stating that the public largely supports state governance: “States protecting our citizens is overwhelmingly popular and bipartisan.”
A recent YouGov poll shows a striking 3-to-1 opposition among surveyed adults against congressional measures that would restrict state regulation of AI. Bores is one of the co-authors of New York’s RAISE Act, which aims to impose stringent oversight on major AI companies. This act has already passed through the state Legislature and is waiting for Governor Kathy Hochul’s approval.
Legislative Developments
The federal pre-emption discussion escalated early this week. On Monday, Republican Representative Steve Scalise hinted at possibly including legislation to supersede state laws on AI within the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Historically, lawmakers attach unrelated amendments to the NDAA, leveraging its status as essential legislation.
Immediate pushback emerged from Democratic Senator Brian Schatz. He labeled the proposal as “a poison pill” and signaled intentions to block it. In a contrasting opinion, former President Donald Trump expressed support for limiting state regulations on AI, emphasizing its role in bolstering the U.S. economy.
Responses From Key Figures
- David Sacks, the White House AI czar, supports federal pre-emption.
- Marc Andreesen, a prominent venture capitalist, stated that having a 50-state framework stifles innovation.
- Florida Governor Ron DeSantis criticized the pre-emption effort, calling it an infringement on state sovereignty.
- Steve Bannon argued that current regulations for nail salon licenses are stricter than those for significant AI companies.
The debate intensified further when a draft executive order aimed at pre-empting state regulations leaked. This order remains unactioned, as the administration has yet to comment publicly on its status.
Opposition to Pre-emption Efforts
Critics of federal pre-emption argue that such a move could lead to an absence of effective regulation, particularly since federal efforts are progressing slowly. They believe a blanket federal law could undermine individual liberties and fail to address important issues such as online safety and algorithmic discrimination.
Massachusetts Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey have both rallied against the pre-emption attempts, stating it could prevent crucial bipartisan efforts to protect various societal interests.
The Implications Ahead
As discussions continue, Max Bodach from the Foundation for American Innovation noted that the political narrative surrounding AI is evolving. He anticipates more alliances forming across political differences in response to the unfolding situation.
As of Friday, Republican leaders encouraged the White House to postpone any action related to the executive order while seeking more time to incorporate pre-emption language into the NDAA. The outcome of this debate on AI regulation remains critical, shaping future governance and technological growth in the United States.
