Rocky Mountain AI
For every stunning feat of progress in the realm of artificial intelligence (AI), it seems there is a new proposed regulation. AI related legislation has proliferated across state dockets, with almost 700 bills introduced this year alone. States that are early adopters of regulatory frameworks to govern AI are likely to set the tone for others, effectively creating a patchwork of expansive AI legislation across the United States and a nightmare for innovators and users alike. Colorado’s SB24-205, “Concerning Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence,” which was passed and signed into law in May, is one such bill.
SB24-205 regulates AI comprehensively. This means that it regulates the model itself, not just the actions taken with or resulting from the model. The law places requirements on every step of the development process to ensure that “algorithmic discrimination” does not occur in areas of consequential decision making, like healthcare and hiring. Developers are tasked with anticipating and preventing any potential scenario where their system’s algorithm might discriminate against a user.
The nature of AI, and technology more broadly, is one of both rapid development and trial and error. Placing such a burden upon innovators will inevitably have a chilling effect on their willingness to participate in the mission of making America a world leader in AI. The same sectors where SB24-205 is the most skeptical of AI also stand to benefit the most from progress in this field. The technology can reduce human bias in lending and financial processes, transform classrooms by offering personalized feedback, and revolutionize the medical field and save millions of lives.
Despite the threat Colorado’s approach poses to unlocking the potential of AI, it is poised to set the tone for other states’ legislation. State bills that stick tend to spread in the absence of a federal framework and lawmakers are eager to address the fears surrounding a technology sometimes associated with doom and gloom. No innovator will be able to afford the monetary or time cost of complying with a patchwork of comprehensive regulations across multiple states.
Luckily, there is an alternative to putting innovators in the impossible position of “anticipate all potential misuse or face punishment.” The consequential areas where discrimination often occurs have systems in place to address prejudice and unfairness. Protections against discrimination for employees, students, and patients are some of the most robust in the American legal system, and just because a machine is the perpetrator does not mean that they cease to apply.
In the spirit of this approach, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) recently mapped out a Model State AI Act to provide lawmakers with a solution that balances the outcry for action on AI with a respect for the process of innovation. Unlike the Colorado regime, it focuses on understanding how the technology can be leveraged to help the state and prevent a mess of red tape. It recommends creating a dedicated state office that focuses on AI and how to apply existing laws and regulations rather than create new ones. It also asks state agencies to evaluate and report on how they are using AI and it encourages a learning approach that allows tech innovators to collaborate and dialogue with state officials.
When the governor of Colorado signed SB24-205 into law, he observed in his signing statement that, “I am concerned about the impact this law may have on an industry that is fueling critical technological advancements across our state for consumers and enterprises alike. Government regulation that is applied at the state level in a patchwork across the country can have the effect to tamper innovation and deter competition in an open market.” States should heed this stunning admission from Colorado, rather than follow in its footsteps.