Pointing out the hypocrisy of the right wing is of little use to alleviate that sacrifice. Still, one provision sandwiched between the drastic tax and spending bills for Republicans is particularly noticeable in its ideological contradiction: a decade-long ban on state AI regulations.
Yes, that means that parties are trying to directly intervene in state policy decisions rather than crying out federal overreach. Of course, Republicans have always defended the rights of the state when it is politically convenient to do so. And while GOP supporters say “one big beautiful bill” will prevent the confusing patchwork of AI laws from shaping the whole country, it still includes exemptions from state laws that promote AI development. Go to the diagram.
The 1,116-page legislative package, a key conduit for the GOP to enact President Donald Trump’s budget goals, passed the House on May 22nd with a one-vote margin. As traditional fiscal conservatives fight Trump’s Maghgar allies, lawmakers hope to complete the bill by the end of July to avoid default, but it will be weeks before they see another vote.
To the joy of the tech industry, the GOP budget bill proposes to allocate millions of dollars to the Pentagon for weapons powered by AI and $25 million in contracts for AI systems to detect “Medicare fraud.” Republicans also want to allocate $500 million over a decade to update the government system with AI. That time span will ban new state-level AI regulations and also ban enforcement of dozens of existing state regulations. These existing rules aim for broad concerns, particularly in the misinformation of deepfakes in children, algorithmic rent setting tools, and AI-generated explicit content. If enacted, the proposed AI provision could lead to “free abuse,” and a coalition of over 140 organizations warned in a letter to Congress earlier this month. Furthermore, generative AI is associated with declining cognitive skills, and is known to vent large amounts of water, consume large amounts of energy, and release greenhouse gases that warm the climate. This technology is rapidly advancing and becoming more extensive, so some of the guardrails that exist today should not be rewind.
Republicans argue that various state laws should be taken away by cohesive national policies. This is a valuable goal, but there is no such federal framework. Also, there is little hope of it coming soon. On his first day in office, Trump overturned Joe Biden’s executive order on AI ethics and safety. This set the goals for a “wide government” approach to regulating generative AI and addressing its social risks. Biden’s EO, published in October 2023, outlined eight guidelines and priorities for AI development. This includes requests for consumer protection and pushing forward to protecting privacy and civil liberties as AI progresses. But even Biden’s executive order did not manifest itself as a set of non-binding guidelines or concrete policy decisions.
Related stories
The RFK Jr. led report included false citations and markers indicating that it was edited using AI.
Tech Watchdog and policy experts point out that despite decades of advocacy, there is still no national data privacy laws. Others refer to social media. Social media has evolved and expanded with little government surveillance, and now it has proven difficult for lawmakers to restrain. Earlier this month, a bipartisan group of 40 state attorney generals opposed the proposed AI rules, writing that “we will impose a broad suspension on all state actions, but Congress is unable to act in this area, is irresponsible and takes away reasonable protections from consumers.”
In December, the Bipartisan House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence issued a lengthy report outlining proposals to promote AI innovation while protecting against the harms of technology. During the House budget hearing, Task Force Chairman, Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.), expressed his dissatisfaction that Congress had not made any progress in codifying the recommendations of the report, citing Congress’ inaction as reason to support the AI provisions of the big beautiful bill. Obernolte argues that state suspensions are necessary to give time to attack the national framework to eliminate the regulatory burden of small-tech startups seeking to navigate the maze of national law. But experts say current state laws aren’t as cumbersome as Republicans made them, and largely focus on things like transparency. For example, California, Illinois and Maryland have enacted laws requiring businesses to disclose how they use AI systems, and in some cases, employers may need to obtain employee consent before using AI to collect data.
And Republicans argue that AI rules are aimed at protecting small businesses, a major technology that leads the push for deregulation. During the Senate hearing on May 8, Openai CEO Sam Altman called state law a “burden,” while Microsoft President Brad Smith advocated limited regulations. (In particular, Altman embraced the widespread demand for AI regulation in 2023, telling Congress that technology “can cause great harm to the world.”) In a Tech Policy Press article, he uncovers the myths of AI law, and the AI director, Kara Williams, Ben Winters, law fellow at the Center for Electronic Privacy Information, declares American tributes. Williams and Winters argue that regulations help innovate rather than hinder it, and note that state transparency requirements are usually limited to basic information about when AI is used by consumers. “If simple disclosure of this nature is disastrous for any company, they probably refer to a product shortage, not a regulation that requires disclosure.”
It is unclear whether the proposed AI rules will do that across the finish line. Now, for consideration, the Senate’s big, beautiful bill is focusing primarily on financial issues such as cutting spending, making certain tax cuts permanent, preventing higher debt caps and, in some cases, opposing Medicaid and food stamp benefits. So far, only Republican senators, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee) and Josh Hawley (R-Misouli) have been publicly pushed back against AI regulations. However, the guidelines known as the Bird Rules could face a steep uphill battle to prevent “unrelated issues” from being included in the budget adjustment bill.
Ultimately, it is up to the senator to determine whether the state’s 10-year ban on AI law qualifies as a budget-related item or whether it needs to be excised. If AI’s regulatory moratorium reaches the chopping block, some Republicans say they will fight to push it through as another law. And even before we see the final settlement bill, we know that these things will be included: tax cuts for rich people, more money to the military and police, and less profit for everyone else.
Truthout helps resist the new McCarthyism
The Trump administration is cracking down on political opposition. Under pressure from an array of McCarthy-style tactics, scholars, activists and nonprofits face the serious threat of speaking out or organising resistance.
Truthout appeals to your support in getting through this storm of censorship. We have not been able to achieve our goals in recent fundraisers and have to ask for your help. Do you make a one-off or monthly donation?
As an independent media with no corporate support or billionaires ownership, Truthout is opposed to the right-wing narrative and is able to reveal the shocking extent of political repression under new McCarthyism. We are committed to doing this job, but are also extremely vulnerable to Trump’s attacks.
Your support will help us continue our nonprofit movement journalism in the face of right-wing authoritarianism. Please make a tax-deductible donation today.
This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) and is freely shared and republished under the terms of the license.
Blue skiing? I created a starter pack so that you can easily follow Truthout people there.
