Washington, D.C. — The U.S. House of Representatives advanced a significant budget reconciliation bill this week, introducing a contentious clause that would enact a ten-year federal ban on state and local regulation of artificial intelligence (AI). This provision has drawn wide-ranging criticism from state leaders, advocacy groups, and some Senate members, raising questions about its viability.
The extensive 1,116-page document includes Section 43201(c), which specifically prevents any state or local entity from enforcing regulations on AI technologies, models, or automated decision-making systems for a decade after the bill’s approval. Supporters of the moratorium, predominantly Republican lawmakers, assert that it seeks to maintain a seamless regulatory framework that encourages innovation and protects the competitive edge of the United States in the global AI market.
Opponents argue that this federal ban would invalidate more than 60 state laws designed to combat issues such as algorithmic bias, deepfake technologies, and consumer protections. They contend that without proactive federal legislation to govern AI, consumers may face increased risks associated with unregulated AI deployment.
Growing bipartisan resistance has emerged against the measure. A coalition of 40 state attorneys general, including Republicans from states like Ohio and Tennessee, have called on Congress to reject the provision, emphasizing the necessity of state-level authority to safeguard citizens from emerging AI risks. In California, a group of 35 bipartisan legislators expressed concerns that the moratorium could weaken state initiatives to mitigate AI misuse, such as scams involving deepfakes.
Furthermore, over 140 organizations, ranging from civil rights groups to academic institutions, have cautioned that the moratorium could lead to rampant abuses of AI technology, threatening civil liberties and privacy standards.
The Senate’s reception of the bill remains uncertain, particularly as some Republican senators express unease about the moratorium’s implications. Senator Marsha Blackburn highlighted the potential disruption to state regulations, notably Tennessee’s ELVIS Act, aimed at protecting against AI impersonation. Similarly, Senator Josh Hawley has voiced his apprehensions regarding the provision.
“We must ensure the safety of our citizens while preserving our leadership in AI,” said Rep. Gus Bilirakis, the Subcommittee chair. He underscored the need to strike a balance between regulation and innovation, asserting that overly stringent oversight could stifle the growth of new American companies.
Critics of stringent regulation, including Rep. John Joyce, argued that the European Union’s recent AI Act is overly complex, thereby complicating the regulatory landscape. Joyce noted the introduction of over 1,000 AI-related bills at the state level in just the last few months, which have resulted in a patchwork of regulations that creates confusion.
Democratic Rep. Kevin Mullin countered the narrative suggesting that regulation inherently stifles innovation, arguing for a balanced approach that allows states to lead in areas of crucial importance, particularly in safeguarding democratic values.
Addressing the rapid evolution of AI technology, Rep. Yvette D. Clarke warned against delaying essential national protections in favor of the moratorium. She urged her colleagues to prioritize citizen safety before discussing preemption.
Amba Kak, co-executive director of the AI Now Institute, emphasized the critical need for state-level AI regulations amid a lack of comprehensive federal laws. She called for heightened scrutiny, suggesting that the fast-paced development of AI technologies necessitates immediate oversight rather than a lengthy delay.
Additionally, the inclusion of this moratorium within a budget reconciliation bill raises procedural concerns. Under Senate rules, provisions not directly related to budgetary matters can be removed from reconciliation bills. This could jeopardize the moratorium’s existence during Senate deliberations.
An anonymous Republican aide acknowledged the ongoing discussions to address Byrd Rule concerns but expressed optimism regarding support from both the Senate and former President Trump. The outcome of the moratorium remains uncertain as Senate negotiations progress, with chances high for revisions or total removal given the prevalent bipartisan opposition.
This article was automatically written by Open AI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate, and any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.