Artificial intelligence is becoming an increasingly large part of many aspects of our lives. It’s no different at the Arizona State Capitol.
If AI can help students write essays or home cooks come up with recipes, can we stop legislators from using it to write legislation, for example?
Kevin DeMenna has been thinking about how AI could change the way the legislative process works, both the potential benefits and drawbacks. Mr. DeMenna is a longtime lobbyist for DeMenna Public Affairs.
He spoke to The Show about observing how much AI is being used in the legislative process over the past year or two.
whole conversation
Kevin DeMenna: Over the last year or two, that’s become the biggest potential problem. It is clear that the policy-making process has not been brought online in any significant way, nor is it officially certain. The solution is that the Speaker of the House has created a committee, headed by Rep. Justin Wilmes, who is smart enough to chair this committee to address and regulate AI.
(Donald) President Trump’s executive order clearly gives little power to the states, but when it comes to internal aspects and implications for Congress, it’s probably best to remind them that our Constitution is slow and tedious, and the process is as it should be.
Well, what can you do then? The banknote creation process can actually introduce any number of banknotes. The production is done in a place called Legislative Counsel, and they are some of the smartest lawyers and drafters in the state.
And what they do is, if you want to write a bill, for example to tax pepperoni pizza, you meet with them or call them and within a few days, an introduced version of that bill is delivered to your office as a legislator.
But now comes the fun part. We asked AI to draft a bill to tax pepperoni pizza. And input matters. But after several attempts, they ended up with a 13-page bill that included more nuanced points, such as the tax’s effective date. The definition of pepperoni was kind of cool, but this bill had a reference to the Registrar of Contractors sandwiched in the middle that had no place and didn’t belong there. Therefore, it is clear that humans must control the final product.
Mark Brody: Well, that’s kind of the key, right? Well, any bill you ask an AI to write at this point is going to be incomplete. But given the way technology changes, it’s not outside the realm of possibility that within a few years, or even months, someone like a legislative lawyer could become obsolete. You can also ask ChatGPT to write a bill just like any other legislator.
DeMenna: And we need to rewrite the rules to accommodate that, and we need to introduce technology. I know they’re looking at it, but one of the things that’s important to understand, especially in state government and Congress, is if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. We also found that there are at least three research committees across state government, including research committees on customer service and other aspects of AI.
Regarding the second area, these 90 members receive information from everywhere. Your job as a legislator is not to be an expert on taxes, water, or the content of any particular bill. Your job is to find the smartest people to work with you, advise you and trust, preferably politically. But once AI starts feeding information into collective systems, we can’t predict, except that we need to be careful.
BRODIE: Well, you’re talking about the staff and the legislators themselves. Do you think AI could impact the types of jobs people like you do? Just like when you go to your legislator and you’re trying to support a bill, or oppose a bill, or disagree with an issue or an issue, how do you stop your legislator from saying, “I don’t need to talk to you, I just want to talk to you. I’ll listen to the pros and cons on ChatGPT, and then I’ll decide for myself.”
DeMenna: That’s a really interesting scenario. I have experienced this situation for several generations, both before and after the advent of the Internet. And with the advent of AI, standing in front of a legislative committee whose members are hostile to your issue is a frightening experience. The best thing you can do is be the smartest person about your problem and hope you can hang around every corner.
The laptop in front of the member on the podium is now the smartest guy in the room. In real time, there aren’t many filters, which can be a nuisance, but the fact that they are available can lead to more detailed hearings and more in-depth analysis.
Brody: So, do you think that perhaps in the short term, in the more immediate future, a better use of AI in Congress than drafting bills and developing actual policy is sort of intelligence, and do you think that’s a fair assessment?
DeMenna: And I think that’s the direction they’re heading. Therefore, the answer is yes. This is a great tool to go deeper and communicate what they do, not just visually. My recommendation is that no matter what app you have, if you have even the slightest interest in law, give it a try. I was surprised by the depth of the information, but not the quality, but the quantity.
Brody: So you mentioned a new House committee dealing with AI, which seems to indicate that some members believe this is an issue worth studying on its own. Aside from how legislators use AI in their daily work, are there specific aspects of AI that you think Congress is looking to regulate policy or really dig into to better understand?
DeMenna: We have a legislative interest in cybersecurity, deepfakes. There are trucks that we’ve been trying to regulate on social media. It seems that this perspective is being applied to AI issues as well. Frankly, the depth of Congress’ knowledge on this issue has to change.
Brody: Well, how do you think this issue and this technology will continue to move forward in Arizona if, as you suggest, the people who are theoretically using it and creating policies for it don’t understand it as well as they probably should?
DeMenna: I could have said the same thing about Twitter and other upgrades 10 years ago. I’m a big believer in publishing more information, and I recognize the quality and veracity issues of what is read, but more information is always better. This is where taking your time and taking an analytical approach.
And if it’s AI, you might need to rename it. If trustworthy AI can accelerate that, our lives will be much better. We fall down the rabbit hole and get lost. But if you can write an algorithm to do it. I’m interested in what’s out there.
Transcripts of KJZZ’s The Show are produced on deadline. This text has been edited for length and clarity and may not be in its final form. The authoritative record of KJZZ’s programming is an audio recording.
