Trump 2.0 Agenda on Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence represents both an unprecedented economic opportunity and a complex security challenge for the United States. As President Trump begins his second term, he should prioritize a comprehensive AI agenda, including deregulation, boosting domestic energy production, and creating infrastructure that will enable reform. This broad-based approach will ensure America’s continued leadership in AI.

Repeal Biden’s AI Executive Order

The Biden administration’s more than 100-page AI executive order should be repealed on the first day of President Trump’s term. While some elements of the executive order are reasonable and reflect President Trump’s more focused 2019 AI executive order, such as leveraging AI to improve government operations, the executive order’s broad scope is Immediate revision of the current regulatory framework is required.

The core of Biden’s directive is to impose onerous reporting requirements on private companies based on the results of safety assessments of their AI systems. This type of rigorous analysis may be appropriate for government operations, where there is little incentive to consider the best evidence and science without rigorous analytical requirements, but it is not appropriate for private sector dynamics. No. Over time, these assessments assess an exhaustive list of potential risks, creating a bureaucratic maze that slows down development cycles.

Companies already have attractive incentives to ensure that their AI products do not harm customers. Their reputation and profits depend on it. Given the unique trade-offs each company faces in terms of risk, competitive pressures, customer needs, and changing market dynamics, companies are typically in the best position to assess the degree of pre-market testing their models require. . In contrast, government regulators are ill-equipped to determine what is safe and what is not in a market as rapidly evolving as AI.

Despite these lessons, the National Institute of Standards and Technology is moving forward with codifying impact assessment procedures into a formal guidance document. The Biden administration’s regulatory approach therefore mimics the failed models seen in California’s failed AI bill and the European Union’s restrictive AI law. The United States cannot afford to follow Europe’s innovation-killing regulatory model that cedes technological leadership to competitors like China.

Reframe AI risk as a national security imperative

AI risks must be addressed as a national security challenge on par with counterterrorism. The most significant threats come from distributed malicious actors and adversarial states that weaponize AI technologies to cause widespread harm. Similar to counter-terrorism policies, which require real-time intelligence and flexible security responses (such as rapidly updating no-fly lists or adapting airport screening procedures), AI surveillance also addresses emerging threats (new types of AI-enabled fraud, etc.). or cyber attacks).

While the Biden administration has made some progress on cybersecurity, including establishing a national cybersecurity strategy with some reasonable provisions, the overall approach to AI safety with top-down bureaucratic rules remains is still too strict.

California’s rejection of SB 1047 illustrates the pitfalls of a bureaucratic approach. It positions big tech companies as adversaries in AI safety efforts. But these companies are not the source of national security threats. Rather, it will serve as a first line of defense against foreign cyberattacks and the misuse of AI by hostile states and criminals.

To the extent possible, Congress should preempt such misguided state-level efforts and instead establish a coherent national framework that recognizes the strategic and national security benefits of America’s strong technology sector. be.

Aligning energy and AI policies

The United States collectively needs reliable and abundant energy. Building a resilient power grid that meets this standard will give AI systems the energy they need to remain competitive with foreign competitors, including China.

Although many technology companies are advocating renewable energy solutions to address AI’s energy needs, these options are not always practical or economically viable. The current practice of supporting net zero and similar climate change initiatives through subsidies for renewable energy should be abolished. These policies distort energy markets, funnel taxpayer dollars to wealthy corporations, and promote woke corporate policies at the expense of the public’s energy needs.

Therefore, repealing Biden’s Inflation Control Act subsidies should be a top priority. To the extent that there is a conflict between technology companies’ climate change goals and AI energy demands, meeting national computing capacity requirements should be a priority.

Similarly, grid reform aimed at shifting the costs of the renewable energy “transition” to utility ratepayers would be a step in the wrong direction. Winning the AI ​​race is important, but the needs of the technology industry do not require public subsidies that harm consumers. The technology industry, one of the largest sectors of the American economy, is completely self-sustaining without government support.

The Trump administration could push for practical ways to bring more energy production online, which would benefit both the technology industry and the general public. Congress recently passed the ADVANCE Act, which redirected the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s mission to support domestic nuclear development. To further that effort, we need to reconsider overly conservative radiation standards that drive up the costs of nuclear power plants.

Similarly, the Biden administration’s power plant rule, which seeks to phase out the majority of the nation’s coal and gas power plants, will be repealed because it represents an attack on the energy production the United States needs for its economy to thrive. Should.

Co-locating data centers with new or existing power plants is another sensible approach, although one that has faced resistance from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). President Trump’s FERC should avoid getting in the way of these beneficial partnerships.

Streamline permissions for AI infrastructure

The Trump administration should prioritize reviewing the National Environmental Policy Act’s regulations related to permitting critical infrastructure such as data centers and new power sources. A recent court decision limited the White House’s authority to set environmental review standards. Even if the ruling stands, each agency would still maintain its own review requirements to supplement the White House regulations. These regulations need to be revised and revisited.

Updates should include increased thresholds for activities that require environmental review. This clarifies the definition of a “major federal action,” implies a $100 million impact standard defined by Congress, and defines what constitutes an action that “significantly impacts the quality of the human environment.” This can be achieved by establishing clear and measurable criteria for

formulate a strategic direction

President Trump’s second term provides a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to shape AI governance for the benefit of the American people. By moving away from the top-down bureaucratic model that defined Biden’s approach to AI governance, the Trump administration can support American innovation while protecting important national security interests. By adopting an agile and adaptive AI strategy, we can keep Americans safe while maintaining the values ​​and competitive advantages that have made America one of the world’s leading hubs of innovation.