Latest news with #IssueOne
The Guardian
25-07-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
The real winners from Trump's ‘AI action plan'? Tech companies
Donald Trump's AI summit in Washington this week was a fanfare-filled event catered to the tech elite. The president took the stage on Wednesday evening, as the song God Bless the USA piped over the loudspeakers, and then he decreed: 'America must once again be a country where innovators are rewarded with a green light, not strangled with red tape, so they can't move, so they can't breathe.' The message was clear – the tech regulatory environment that was once the focus of federal lawmakers is no longer. 'I've been watching for many years,' Trump continued. 'I've watched regulation. I've been a victim of regulation.' As Trump spoke to the crowd, he addressed them as 'the group of smart ones … the brain power'. In front of him were tech leaders, venture capitalists and billionaires, including Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang and Palantir's chief technology officer Shyam Sankar. The Hill and Valley Forum, an influential tech industry interest group, co-hosted the confab, along with the Silicon Valley All-in Podcast, which is hosted by White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks. Dubbed 'Winning the AI Race', the forum was an opportunity for the president to deliver what he called the 'AI action plan', which aims to loosen restrictions on the development and deployment of artificial intelligence. The cornerstone of that plan are three executive orders that Trump said will turn the US into an 'AI export powerhouse' and roll back some of the rules put in place by the Biden administration, which included guardrails around safe and secure AI development. 'Winning the AI race will demand a new spirit of patriotism and national loyalty in Silicon Valley – and long beyond Silicon Valley,' Trump said. One executive order targets what the White House calls 'woke' AI and requires any company receiving federal funding to maintain AI models free from 'ideological dogmas such as DEI'. But the other two focus on deregulation, a major demand of American tech leaders who have taken an increasingly bullish stand on government oversight. One of those promotes the export of 'American AI' to other countries and the other eases environmental rules and expedites federal permitting for power-hungry data centers. To get to this moment, tech companies have been forging a friendly relationship with Trump. The CEOs of Alphabet, Meta, Amazon and Apple donated to the president's inauguration fund and met with him at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, which makes ChatGPT, has become a close ally of Trump, and Nvidia's Huang has also cozied up with the president with promises of investing $500bn in AI infrastructure in the US over the next four years. 'The reality is that big tech companies are still spending tens of millions of dollars to curry favor with lawmakers and shape tech legislation,' said Alix Fraser, the vice-president of advocacy for the nonprofit Issue One. In a report released on Tuesday, Issue One looked at lobbying spending in 2025 and found that the tech industry has spent record-breaking sums. Eight of the largest tech companies spent a combined $36m – that's an average of about $320,000 per day when Congress is in session, according to Issue One. Meta spent the most, $13.8m, and has hired 86 lobbyists this year, according to the report. And Nvidia and OpenAI saw the biggest increases, with Nvidia spending 388% more than the same time last year, and OpenAI spending 44% more. In the lead-up to Trump's unveiling of his AI plan, more than 100 prominent labor, environmental, civil rights and academic groups countered the president and signed a 'People's AI action plan'. In a statement, the groups stressed the need for 'relief from the tech monopolies' that they say 'sacrifice the interests of everyday people for their own profits'. 'We can't let big tech and big oil lobbyists write the rules for AI and our economy at the expense of our freedom and equality, workers and families' wellbeing, even the air we breathe and the water we drink – all of which are affected by the unrestrained and unaccountable rollout of AI,' the groups wrote. Meanwhile, tech companies and industry groups celebrated the executive orders. Microsoft, IBM, Dell, Meta, Palantir, Nvidia, Anthropic, xAI and others praised the plan. James Czerniawski, the head of emerging technology policy at the Consumer Choice Center, a pro-business lobbying group, heralded Trump's AI plan as a 'bold vision'. 'This is a world of difference from the hostile regulatory approach of the Biden administration,' Czerniawski concluded.
The Guardian
25-07-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
The real winners from Trump's ‘AI action plan'? Tech companies
Donald Trump's AI summit in Washington this week was a fanfare-filled event catered to the tech elite. The president took the stage on Wednesday evening, as the song God Bless the USA piped over the loudspeakers, and then he decreed: 'America must once again be a country where innovators are rewarded with a green light, not strangled with red tape, so they can't move, so they can't breathe.' The message was clear – the tech regulatory environment that was once the focus of federal lawmakers is no longer. 'I've been watching for many years,' Trump continued. 'I've watched regulation. I've been a victim of regulation.' As Trump spoke to the crowd, he addressed them as 'the group of smart ones … the brain power'. In front of him were tech leaders, venture capitalists and billionaires, including Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang and Palantir's chief technology officer Shyam Sankar. The Hill and Valley Forum, an influential tech industry interest group, co-hosted the confab, along with the Silicon Valley All-in Podcast, which is hosted by White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks. Dubbed 'Winning the AI Race', the forum was an opportunity for the president to deliver what he called the 'AI action plan', which aims to loosen restrictions on the development and deployment of artificial intelligence. The cornerstone of that plan are three executive orders that Trump said will turn the US into an 'AI export powerhouse' and roll back some of the rules put in place by the Biden administration, which included guardrails around safe and secure AI development. 'Winning the AI race will demand a new spirit of patriotism and national loyalty in Silicon Valley – and long beyond Silicon Valley,' Trump said. One executive order targets what the White House calls 'woke' AI and requires any company receiving federal funding to maintain AI models free from 'ideological dogmas such as DEI'. But the other two focus on deregulation, a major demand of American tech leaders who have taken an increasingly bullish stand on government oversight. One of those promotes the export of 'American AI' to other countries and the other eases environmental rules and expedites federal permitting for power-hungry data centers. To get to this moment, tech companies have been forging a friendly relationship with Trump. The CEOs of Alphabet, Meta, Amazon and Apple donated to the president's inauguration fund and met with him at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, which makes ChatGPT, has become a close ally of Trump, and Nvidia's Huang has also cozied up with the president with promises of investing $500bn in AI infrastructure in the US over the next four years. 'The reality is that big tech companies are still spending tens of millions of dollars to curry favor with lawmakers and shape tech legislation,' said Alix Fraser, the vice-president of advocacy for the nonprofit Issue One. In a report released on Tuesday, Issue One looked at lobbying spending in 2025 and found that the tech industry has spent record-breaking sums. Eight of the largest tech companies spent a combined $36m – that's an average of about $320,000 per day when Congress is in session, according to Issue One. Meta spent the most, $13.8m, and has hired 86 lobbyists this year, according to the report. And Nvidia and OpenAI saw the biggest increases, with Nvidia spending 388% more than the same time last year, and OpenAI spending 44% more. In the lead-up to Trump's unveiling of his AI plan, more than 100 prominent labor, environmental, civil rights and academic groups countered the president and signed a 'People's AI action plan'. In a statement, the groups stressed the need for 'relief from the tech monopolies' that they say 'sacrifice the interests of everyday people for their own profits'. 'We can't let big tech and big oil lobbyists write the rules for AI and our economy at the expense of our freedom and equality, workers and families' wellbeing, even the air we breathe and the water we drink – all of which are affected by the unrestrained and unaccountable rollout of AI,' the groups wrote. Meanwhile, tech companies and industry groups celebrated the executive orders. Microsoft, IBM, Dell, Meta, Palantir, Nvidia, Anthropic, xAI and others praised the plan. James Czerniawski, the head of emerging technology policy at the Consumer Choice Center, a pro-business lobbying group, heralded Trump's AI plan as a 'bold vision'. 'This is a world of difference from the hostile regulatory approach of the Biden administration,' Czerniawski concluded.
CNBC
25-07-2025
- Business
- CNBC
CCTV Script 24/07/25
The Trump administration's newly released "AI Action Plan" marks a clear policy shift compared to the previous Biden administration. The Trump government advocates for loosening regulations, accelerating the construction of data centers, and supporting the export of AI technologies. Analysts point out that tech companies like OpenAI and Microsoft are clear beneficiaries of this plan. According to the latest guidelines, federal agencies are instructed to remove any regulatory barriers hindering AI development. Additionally, when allocating federal funding, they will consider whether state-level regulations are unfavorable to AI. The U.S. tech industry has been working to build closer ties with the Trump administration. Over the past few months, several companies have announced investments exceeding $1.5 trillion in data centers and manufacturing sectors. According to the U.S. nonprofit organization Issue One, eight American tech companies, including OpenAI, Meta, and NVIDIA, spent a total of $36 million on federal lobbying in the first half of this year. Critics have raised concerns about this lobbying influence. For instance, the executive director of the U.S. nonprofit "Tech Oversight Project" argued that the White House's AI plan seems like it simply rubber-stamped recommendations from big tech CEOs, turning them into official government documents. However, it's important to note that implementing these plans faces significant real-world challenges. Brooke, Vice President of the Atlantic Council, highlighted execution challenges. He questioned whether, given the widespread budget cuts and staff shortages in the federal government, there are sufficient expertise and financial resources to fulfill the commitments and goals outlined in the AI Action Plan. Additionally, experts have pointed out difficulties in energy planning. A former White House Chief Information Officer told CNBC that the government faces tough choices: on one hand, it must ensure stable power supply for data centers handling critical government or corporate tasks; on the other hand, these data centers are often located near residential areas and schools, which complicates planning. "...now you're thinking about, well, who gets powered today? Is it a residential neighborhood? Is it the schools, or is it this data center?... it's really a balancing act on a tightrope." Finally, legal experts have raised concerns about the "AI Action Plan," focusing on two key issues: the unresolved copyright disputes and the vague definition of "ideological bias." Currently, U.S. media and entertainment companies have filed dozens of lawsuits regarding whether tech companies can use copyrighted content to train AI models. The Trump administration has yet to make a clear statement on this issue. What Trump has explicitly stated, however, is his demand for AI models to maintain ideological neutrality. However, Professor Little from the University of California, San Francisco, pointed out that the U.S. government's definition of ideology remains unclear.
The Hill
16-06-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Experts warn FEC is a watchdog lacking ‘bark or bite' with no quorum
Experts are sounding alarms over the status of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), which has been largely paralyzed from performing much of its work. Former Commissioner Allen Dickerson's departure from the body at the conclusion of his term at the end of April gave the normally six-person FEC its third vacancy. A loss of quorum now prevents the FEC from carrying out many of its responsibilities, including holding meetings, conducting investigations and issuing penalties against potential violators. An apparent lack of urgency in filling the vacancies could cause a significant backlog of cases as the midterm elections approach. 'It really puts the country in a bind when the FEC doesn't have a working quorum, without enough commissioners to do its job, everything just piles up,' said Michael Beckel, the senior research director for the cross-partisan group Issue One, which educates and advocates on issues concerning U.S. democracy, elections and government. 'At the end of the day, without a quorum, the FEC is a watchdog that doesn't have the ability to bark or bite,' he said. The lack of quorum is a rarity in the agency's 50-year history but not entirely without precedent. The first instance occurred in 2008, toward the end of George W. Bush's presidency. Beckel said political pressure contributed to the end of that six-month gap in the FEC's work as Republican presidential nominee John McCain used public financing for his campaign and needed the agency to sign off on the funding, which it could only do with the quorum of at least four members. But no major party nominee has used public financing since then, and Beckel expressed doubt about a similar situation arising to create the same pressure. 'Without the same sort of political pressure existing now, it's hard to imagine what contours might arise that would lead to a logjam being broken,' he said. The other instances came in Trump's first term, in 2019 and 2020, with just a one-month respite between them. Complaints can still be submitted to the agency during this period, but the FEC can't enact fines or other penalties, issue new rules or advisories or conduct audits. Since the current loss of quorum began, two scheduled public meetings have been canceled. The pending situation could be similar to the one that Dickerson, Commissioner Shana Broussard and former Commissioner Sean Cooksey inherited when the Senate confirmed their nominations to the agency in December 2020, ending the last loss of quorum. The FEC last had six members in January. Dickerson told The Hill in an interview that much of the backlog dated back to the 2016 election cycle, and the commission's members had to make 'very difficult decisions,' taking into account a limited budget, about what cases they could move forward on and what needed to be let go given time constraints. He credited Broussard, who served as chair in 2021 while he served as vice chair, as being key to clearing the backlog. 'We had a shared commitment to ensuring that the commission was restored to functioning order, and that required dealing with, in many cases, old and complex cases that were really making it difficult for the agency to get back up and running,' Dickerson said. 'And that was a lot of hard work and late nights.' He said the extent of the problem that the current lack of quorum causes for the FEC will depend on how long it lasts and the number of credible complaints that are filed, adding that often complaints aren't well argued or are designed more for 'headlines' than the law. Dickerson said a lot of focus is on the FEC's enforcement docket, but he expressed more concern about its current inability to engage on rulemaking and requests for advisory opinions to assist the public. 'The closer one gets to an election, the more likely it is that the outside world is going to need guidance from the commission on novel questions of the law,' he said. 'And until a quorum is restored, that's a key function of the commission that may be undervalued by some people, which I think is maybe its most important function.' Cooksey stepped down from his post on the first day of Trump's term and expressed hope that Trump would nominate appointees to fill the positions of commissioners whose terms have expired. Commissioners are allowed to continue to serve on the FEC even after their term has expired until the Senate confirms a replacement. Two of the three current commissioners, Broussard and James Trainer III, are serving on expired terms. But Trump removed former Chair Ellen Weintraub, a Democrat, in February and didn't lay out any process to replace her. Weintraub argued her unilateral removal by Trump was illegal, but her seat has been vacant since then. Weintraub said in an interview that Congress anticipated the problem of a new commissioner not being ready in time to replace an outgoing one in allowing commissioners to remain until a replacement is set. 'That is a normal process. That's what should have happened in my case, and had I been replaced in the normal course, rather than summarily moved, the commission would not be without a quorum today,' she said. The Hill has reached out to the White House for comment about whether Trump has any plans to nominate additional commissioners soon. The FEC declined to comment on the vacancies and possible future nominations. While the lack of quorum has mostly occurred during the Trump administration, numerous administrations have allowed commissioners to continue to serve well past their term's expiration. Dickerson said he wouldn't consider this to be a sign of a lack of prioritization but an effect of the large size of the federal government and smallness of the FEC. 'We need to hope that those seats are filled. I think it's best for the republic to have six working commissioners with a range of views and with significant bipartisan buy-in on its decision-making,' he said. 'But I'm not going to characterize the decision-making of the government overall based upon an agency the size of the FEC.' Beckel said the loss of a quorum shouldn't be interpreted as an opportunity for candidates to 'push the envelope,' as willful violations of campaign finance law can still face prosecution from the Justice Department (DOJ) and complaints can still be filed to the FEC. 'There will still be watchdogs out there filing campaign finance complaints,' he said. 'There will still be partisan actors out there who are making sure that their opponents don't do anything awry.' But Weintraub and some reform groups expressed concern that bad actors could feel emboldened to commit violations. Omar Noureldin, the senior vice president of policy for the watchdog Common Cause, noted the DOJ's shrinking of its public integrity unit in the aftermath of the resignations of multiple officials over the case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams being dropped. 'It's very clear, from what we've seen from the civil rights division to the public integrity section to the tax division, that enforcement is not going to be something that is a priority,' he said. 'There are state laws that regulate campaign finance and city laws for local elections and so those are still avenues by which we can hold some folks accountable,' Noureldin added. 'But it's not going to be at the scale that the FEC can do.' But some also were concerned about the potential members the Trump administration would choose. Erin Chlopak, the senior director of campaign finance for the Campaign Legal Center, pointed to Trump's executive order exerting control over federal agencies, including the FEC. She said this is 'completely contrary' to Congress's vision of the agency as independent. 'That independence is uniquely crucial to its ability to do its job,' she said. 'If that's going to be an issue, then that's yet another reason why restoration of the forum poses different concerns, sort of unique concerns in this moment.'
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
FEC to lose quorum after another commissioner resigns
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is set to have fewer members than necessary for a quorum following the resignation of a second commissioner from the body this year. Commissioner Allen Dickerson, a Republican, announced his decision to step down effective Wednesday evening at the FEC's meeting earlier in the day. He was nominated by President Trump and confirmed by the Senate to serve on the commission in 2020, with his term set to expire April 30 of this year. Dickerson's resignation is particularly consequential because it will prevent the FEC from being able to conduct business on various issues, including issuing opinions on cases and acting on campaign finance violations. Republican Sean Cooksey, whom Trump also appointed, resigned from his position in January, expressing hope that Trump would nominate new appointees to take over for commissioners whose terms had expired. Trump dismissed Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub in February. Weintraub has argued that her removal by the president is illegal, but her position remains vacant on the body. The FEC is made up of six members with no more than three from each party, ensuring some amount of bipartisanship in its decisions. Four members must be present for a quorum, but Dickerson's resignation will lower the number to three. Issue One, a nonprofit political reform group, noted in a release that this will be the fourth time in the FEC's history that it doesn't have a quorum. It lost a quorum in 2008, during George W. Bush's administration, and on two occasions during Trump's first term in 2019 and 2020. 'Without a quorum, the FEC is a watchdog without a bark or bite,' Issue One senior research director Michael Beckel said in the release. 'Losing its quorum defangs the FEC at a time when the robust scrutiny of money in politics is needed more than ever.' 'Without a quorum, the FEC cannot investigate campaign finance complaints, conduct audits, levy fines against rule-breakers, issue new rules or advisory opinions, initiate new litigation, or even hold meetings,' Beckel added. 'What the FEC needs most is a full array of commissioners who are firmly committed to enforce our nation's campaign finance laws — individuals who put country over party and who understand the importance of the rule of law.' Presidents are responsible for appointing commissioners, who must be confirmed by the Senate. Trump has yet to announce any appointments to the body. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
