Recent AI Legislation Roundup: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly
With its ever-evolving capabilities and multitude of uses, it should be no surprise that artificial intelligence (AI) is seemingly everywhere. From kitchen appliances to military operations, the technology has been rapidly incorporated into daily life and industry. The legislatures of this country are no exception, and AI bills have multiplied rapidly over recent years. The following legislative efforts are but three of many, and represent the national mood; a mix of good optimistic innovation, a bad spread of social media age verification measures, and an ugly grasp at overly zealous regulation.
The Good
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) introduced a legislative framework for shoring American leadership in AI. His framework aligns with the Trump Administration’s AI Action Plan and presents American innovation in the realm of AI as crucial for protecting the nation’s values and security. His “Legislative Framework for American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence” begins with the proposed “SANDBOX Act.” The act would allow AI developers to coordinate with the White House for a period of time to suspend or modify regulations impacting their development. Within the confines of the sandbox, policymakers and innovators alike can carefully assess which regulations are outdated or not applicable to the world of AI and which ones might be helpful. Adam Thierer, R Street, described the problem the SANDBOX Act helps remedy, “When red tape grows without constraint and becomes untethered from modern marketplace realities, it can undermine innovation and investment, undermine entrepreneurship and competition, raise costs to consumers, limit worker opportunities, and undermine long-term economic growth.” Cruz’s framework offers a promising vision of actionable policies that can improve the national climate for innovators and consumers alike.
The Bad
Bad age verification legislation is spreading from the world of social media to that of AI. U.S. Senator Jon Husted (R-OH) introduced the CHAT Act, requiring AI chatbots to verify their users age. Like any age verification measure, it presents a collection of risks to user privacy and data all while failing to protect children in a sustainable way that involves their caregivers. Covering the phenomenon of a growing push to age gate AI, Reason Magazine concluded “Protecting kids from harmful interactions with chatbots is an important goal…policymakers and regulators would be wise to remember the benefits that AI may bring and not pursue solutions that discourage AI companies from making potentially helpful technology available to kids…” There are stronger alternatives for protecting children’s online experience that don’t involve government mandates and the involuntary turnover of troves of personal information. The market for parental tools for social media is an ever growing one and new applications have given many families peace of mind, the same empowerment is possible for the ways families use AI.
The Ugly
Ever the leader in efforts to regulate AI, California’s state legislature narrowly avoided the ugly AB1018, a bill to regulate all “automated decisions systems,” this session. The American Enterprise Institute’s Will Rinehart described the scope of the bill “AB 1018’s definitions cast such a wide net, that they would regulate virtually any computational process used in business operations. Even California’s State Water Board warned that Excel workbooks could trigger regulatory requirements.” AB1018 would cement a bureaucracy that stifled innovation in the very state that often sets the tone for the rest of the nation’s tech sectors. While the bill did not make it through this session, it was designated a “two year bill” and is sure to rear its ugly head next year. Legislation like AB1018 neglects to consider the real world costs of excessive bureaucracy. Valuable progress is stopped in its tracks, small businesses fail under the pressure of compliance costs, and agencies are overwhelmed by the sheer amount of regulatory hurdles they must approve.
AI legislation abounds. Lawmakers who wish to throw their hat in the ring and engage with the most transformative technology of our lifetimes can look to Cruz’s SANDBOX as a guide. Encouraging innovation, collaboration between agencies and AI companies, and communication between legislators, constituents, and AI innovators, is the path forward. Weariness is the appropriate response to Husted and others’ efforts to bring the perils of age verification processes into yet another category. State lawmakers in particular have a role to play: avoiding preemptive legislation, like that of California, and expressing support for a national framework, like that of Cruz, because it takes good policies to fight the bad and ugly ones.
Links to Learn More
