Republicans Pander to Big Tech With Proposed 10-Year Ban on State AI Regulations
Over the weekend, Republicans in the House unveiled a sweeping budget proposal that includes massive cuts to Medicaid, food assistance, climate programs, and more. But buried amongst those cuts, legislators also proposed a decade-long ban on AI regulations at the state level. Although framed as upholding innovation, the attempted moratorium is yet another clear display of the federal government pandering to the desires of Big Tech.
Within the House Energy and Commerce Committee's bill, lawmakers proposed that 'no state or political subdivision may enforce any law of regulation regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems' starting from the day that the proposal is enacted.
Laws imposing 'a substantive design, performance, data-handling, documentation, civil liability, taxation, fee, or other requirement' on listed AI systems would fall under the moratorium. However, there are a few exceptions, like if the above requirements are due to federal regulation or if the law also applies to non-AI systems that 'provide comparable functions'. In addition, the pause isn't applicable to regulations that 'remove legal impediments' or 'facilitate the deployment or operation of' AI systems.
The proposal comes shortly after the Commerce Committee's hearing titled 'Winning the AI Race'. During his testimony, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said that allowing states to assemble a patchwork regulatory framework 'will slow us down at a time where I don't think it's in anyone's interest.' And sure, abiding by regulations in 50 different states is hard. But a) that's how the U.S. works, each state can have its own unique laws, and b) there wouldn't be such an amalgamation of AI regulation if the federal government actually put together its own.
Regardless of which party holds power, the U.S. is notorious for falling behind when it comes to tech-related legislation. One of the biggest examples is the U.S.'s lack of its own comprehensive federal privacy law. As a result, states have no choice but to enact piecemeal legislation to tackle a rapidly changing environment as new technologies usher in their own unique concerns. Per the National Conference of State Legislatures, at least 45 states, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Washington, D.C., introduced AI bills.
On Monday, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Illinois), a ranking member of the Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee, blasted the proposal as a 'giant gift to Big Tech' and 'shows that Republicans care more about profits than people.' Similarly, the Tech Oversight Project's executive director, Sacha Haworth, told the Hill that the 'so-called 'states' rights'' party's provision 'is not only hypocritical, it's a massive handout to Big Tech.' Haworth added that 'it comes as no surprise that Big Tech is trying to stop [efforts to regulate AI] dead in its tracks.'
Since taking office, Trump has taken a clear stance on letting AI run wild. In January, he rescinded Biden's executive order for AI regulation and, shortly after, directed the Office of Management and Budget to overhaul its directive on federal uses of AI. Although Trump released his own AI guidance last month that copies Biden's in a few areas, his administration has overall played fast and loose with AI, with no concern for analyzing its civil rights impacts.
During his opening statement at last week's meeting, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) summarized the dominant attitude towards AI regulations, stating, 'All of this busybody bureaucracy – whether Biden's industrial policy on chip exports or industry and regulator-approved 'guidance' documents – is a wolf in sheep's clothing. To lead in AI, the U.S. cannot allow regulation, even the supposedly benign kind, to choke innovation or adoption.'
Currently, the proposed moratorium's full scope is unclear. David Stauss, an attorney with Husch Blackwell, told the International Association of Privacy Professionals, 'A lot would depend on how the terms are defined.' Legally speaking, AI is a nebulous term. Stauss noted that while Colorado's AI Act uses a broad definition based on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's own, other states are more limited. But if federal legislator's definition is broad, Stauss said, 'all sorts of laws could be implicated, even product liability and medical malpractice laws as extreme edge cases.'
It's entirely possible that this proposal gets removed down the road. If it stays, its language will likely be adjusted one way or the other. But its very inclusion in House Republicans' budget bill suggests that the U.S. will continue hurtling down the AI-or-be-damned pathway with no regard for the consequences.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC Sports
32 minutes ago
- NBC Sports
Missouri Senate passes plan to keep Chiefs at Arrowhead Stadium
There's nothing like a ticking clock to get things done. The Missouri Senate, faced with the inevitability of the Chiefs and Royals leaving for Kansas, passed on Thursday morning a plan to keep both teams from leaving. The consensus was reached at a time when many doubted the ability of the Senate to strike a deal. The legislation, which devotes more than $1.5 billion to the football and baseball stadiums, was crafted at a special session called by governor Mike Kehoe. To get there, Senate Republicans increased the aid package for recent St. Louis tornadoes from $25 million to $100 million. This lured enough Democrats to support such a large expenditure for a pair of private businesses that arguably don't need to be subsidized by taxpayers. Ultimately, the stadium effort prevailed by a vote of 19-13. The GOP-controlled House is expected to adopt the plan on Monday. For the Chiefs, Missouri will kick half of the $1.15 billion needed for renovations to Arrowhead Stadium. This doesn't mean the deal is done. The Chiefs could still choose to go to Kansas, where a new stadium would be built. While the team's lease runs through 2030, Kansas has said its offer expires on June 30. If so, the Chiefs will be making a decision sooner than later.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk didn't have to defeat the swamp, he had to defeat Maga and he failed
Elon Musk's mistake, it seems, was believing Republicans and Donald Trump when they told him they cared about America's debt. Just a week or so ago, when Musk was taking leave of the White House, he had a ceremony in which Trump praised him and his efforts, and gave him a pretty model of a key, saying he could come back any time. But now Musk has broken ranks and broken silence, calling Trump's only significant piece of legislation a sham. Musk's right. It is. But it might be too late to save America's fiscal position. For a hundred and thirty days, Musk and his boys prowled the bureaucracy, looking for fat to trim. They got access to databases and to bank accounts. They found – in their own estimation – hundreds of millions of dollars of, for instance, redundant annual subscriptions for unused software. And they were used as a battering ram and an excuse for many very dubious cuts, some of which will cost lives: cuts to USAID, cuts to disease prevention, cuts to things that cost very little but have such extraordinary externalities in terms of keeping African birth rates manageable by decreasing child mortality that cutting them is the falsest of false economies. But let's take Musk at his word. He wants to cut the budget so the US government can control its debt. Interest rates are rising – returning to historically normal levels. This is murder, it's death, it's failure, to countries like Britain and America who are currently borrowing more than ever before and running unsustainable deficits on top of that borrowing. Debt interest will drown us. Our states will collapse. Everything will cost more than it has ever cost. This is inevitable without a sound fiscal policy. But most Republicans only say they care about that in an election year. They want to increase spending in their districts. They want their favoured groups to get subsidies. They all have squeaky wheels in mind that need the grease. Trump's headline piece of legislation, the Big Beautiful Bill, is guaranteed to jack up American borrowing to end of the world levels. Musk correctly calls the bill a 'disgusting abomination.' He correctly says that those with conscience must 'kill the bill.' He threatened those Republicans in the House of Representatives who voted for the bill with primary challengers; he said they have betrayed their country and there will be consequences. But apart from three all House Republicans voted for the bill. Even a man as rich as Musk can't fund that many primary opponents. There is safety in numbers, particularly if you are exploding the national debt for selfish, short-term reasons of your own popularity. Musk is right. America's national debt is terribly large. He's right that the federal budget is insane and needs radical surgery. He's correct that the trend in American fiscal policy is one of deranged adding to the debt at all times. Correct, too, that democracy dies when the people – or the vested interests – discover they can vote themselves more money until the state capsizes. (The same thing has been happening in Britain since the First World War.) But Musk was wrong when he believed Donald Trump or those of his surrogates. Trump has declared corporate bankruptcy a number of times. He is continually receiving cash injections from supporters, from people who want things. His previous presidency precipitously increased America's national debt, even as – for most of those four years – the economy boomed and roared ahead. Trump loves debt. Trump loves borrowing. He'll borrow until the end. Musk ought to have learnt that lesson by now. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Speaker Johnson, the Blue Dogs are here to throw you a bone
Over the last few weeks, Americans have been hearing endless mentions of the 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' Although the Republicans' reconciliation proposal is certainly big — so big it would add over $4 trillion to our national debt — it is by no means beautiful. There is no way to hide the ugly reality of this bill. It allows for $2.8 trillion in new borrowing over the 10-year budget window, adds $3.3 trillion to the already more than $36 trillion national debt, and cuts over $700 billion from federal health care spending, primarily Medicaid. By 2034, our debt-to-GDP ratio would be at 125 percent. Interest payments could exceed $2 trillion a year, making it impossible to pay off the debt. Considering we already spend more on servicing our debt than on stewarding American defense capabilities and health care, we are accelerating down an unsustainable and dangerous path. Unrestrained fiscal policy has plagued the U.S. for decades, and it has not been limited to one side of the aisle. While members of Congress sit insulated on Capitol Hill and alternate between irresponsible tax cuts and excessive spending, life gets worse for everyday Americans. Moody's recently lowered the U.S. long-term credit ratings to AA1 from AAA. At the same time, the world is moving further and further away from the American dollar. This means Americans are left with a smaller economy, less economic mobility, and a lower standard of living. As we know all too well, excessive borrowing leads to inflation and drives up interest rates, making it harder for Americans to finance a home, start a business, and put food on the table. This is unsustainable and has to change very quickly. Don't just take it from us: In a recent Wall Street Journal editorial, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) wrote called it 'essential that Congress deviate from its current path. Under every scenario now being considered, federal debt continues to skyrocket from its current level of almost $37 trillion.' So far in the 119th Congress, the majority hasn't shown much of an appetite to deviate from this trajectory. In order to hand out tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy, the Republican reconciliation package would make devastating cuts to food assistance programs, health coverage, and other federal resources that hard-working Americans rely on to make ends meet. Is it so important to our colleagues across the aisle to give a handout to their mega-wealthy buddies that they would strap everyday Americans with even more crushing debt? The national debt and our federal government's spending deficit may seem like far-off, intangible concepts when D.C. bureaucrats and television talking heads drone on about them for weeks on end. But the American people know perfectly well how debt adds up. Our constituents have to balance their budgets every month — why can't the federal government do the same? The truth is, we can. For decades, Congress has chosen not to do so, perhaps because it isn't politically expedient or it just takes too much hard work. Regardless, Congress and our federal government broadly are derelict in our duty to responsibly manage the government's finances. Since our coalition was founded in the 1990s, the cornerstone of the Blue Dogs' work has been our relentless focus on fiscal responsibility. For years, Blue Dogs supported legislation to curb reckless spending, hold both Democrats and Republicans accountable to our constituents, and require that Congress balance the budget. We had a willing partner in President Bill Clinton, who remains the most recent example of real fiscal discipline in the federal government. Now, as then, Blue Dogs know that the American people have one demand for their legislators as prices continue to rise and reckless fiscal policy threatens their livelihoods: 'It's the economy, stupid!' As this cry goes unanswered by a majority in Congress that proposes to drive our national debt to truly harrowing heights, Americans who work hard to pay their bills and take care of their families are losing confidence in their government. Each day this irresponsible spending continues, young Americans' dreams that they can achieve the economic prosperity their parents did slip further and further away. The Blue Dogs' vision to solve this problem is proving that our government can work. We believe that change is not only possible but essential. It doesn't have to be this way. There's another way forward: a bipartisan, commonsense way that pays down our debt while extending tax cuts to working Americans who need them most. Evidently, our offers to Republican leadership to work together on this fell on deaf ears this time. But with costs rising, confidence in government is sinking. Americans are eager for change, and we remain committed to using a steady hand to deliver pragmatic policies that most Americans agree on. In that spirit, our offer still stands. We are eager to work with our Republican colleagues to solve the issues facing our country and deliver results to the American people. We ask our colleagues: Will you work with us to deliver results? The authors are all members of the House Blue Dog Coalition. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
