Last month, we examined what a Trump-Vance administration could mean for tech policy. Similarly, understanding the Democratic ticket’s stance on policies that impact technology and innovation can aid in decision-making as the presidential election rapidly approaches. Vice President Kamala Harris and Vice President nominee Tim Walz have decades of political involvement that shed light on their approach to critical tech issues. Examining their public record alongside the 2024 Democrat platform reveals an administration eager to regulate.

On AI, the Biden Administration’s agenda will continue. Harris has expressed support for the sweeping Executive Order on AI, which mandates a series of regulations and restrictions on the technology. Harris also released her own statement emphasizing the need for increased rulemaking on AI. She favors strong compliance measures, particularly for any AI used in government agencies. Shortly after the EO was published, she pushed for a requirement to make all government agencies verify that their AI would not violate anyone’s rights or be racist before using it. Though Walz’s involvement in tech policy is less defined, Minnesota became a leader in regulating AI through state legislation under his governorship. His gubernatorial track record is one of preemptive regulation.

The Harris-Walz campaign website does little to enlighten voters on their actual strategy around AI. The “issues” section includes a promise to “continue to support American leadership in semiconductors, clean energy, AI, and other cutting-edge industries of the future.” This promise is difficult to reconcile with both candidates’ interventionist approach to the technology.

Should Harris and Walz commit to and expand upon every regulation outlined in the EO, the state of AI innovation in the U.S. will encounter a grave challenge. A federal government that views AI as an inherent existential threat instead of a tool capable of profound progress will push away inventors and investors, causing the nation to lose its competitive edge in an industry vital to our economy and national security.

Harris has long been an ardent supporter of net neutrality, the utility-style regulation of the internet. In 2017, she penned an op-ed espousing the virtues of net neutrality and claiming, “We can’t count on the free market to protect broadband consumers.” Despite its overturn the same year, Harris has continued to express her support for a return to regulation and backed recent efforts to restore net neutrality. A Harris-Walz Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will pursue increased control over the internet instead of competitive solutions. A return to net neutrality will bring red tape to an industry that has thrived in the absence of utility-style regulation.

On social media issues, particularly related to online speech, both Harris and Walz have advocated for increased government interference. Harris applauded the senate passage of the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA.) Among other issues, KOSA threatens media platforms and their users’ First Amendment rights by putting content moderation in the hands of the Federal government.

Additionally, in a recent video, Walz boldly proclaimed that “misinformation and hate speech” were not protected by the First Amendment. This philosophy could easily be used to justify censorship and government overreach. Placing the power to determine what speech is and is not protected in the hands of a partisan administration, regardless of ideology, is a dangerous game.

While Harris and Walz themselves have left many areas of tech and innovation policy ambiguous or unaddressed in their public statements, the 2024 DNC platform provides a sample of the tone that their administration will adopt. The technology section begins with a sentence committing to American leadership, quickly followed by paragraphs committing to establishing and bolstering rules to govern the internet, social media, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology. The precautionary approach of the party platform will certainly make it more difficult for smaller companies, new developers, and emerging technologies to carry the cost and effort of compliance.

While many of the details of the Harris-Walz policy vision are still hazy, their long tenures in public office and the verbiage of the DNC platform fill in the gaps. Increased government involvement in the technology sector seems inevitable under this administration.