As the Senate debates a proposal to pause state regulations of artificial intelligence, it needs to balance addressing concerns about AI with innovation.
As the Senate debates a proposal in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to temporarily pause state regulations of artificial intelligence, it must balance promoting innovation and addressing concerns about AI.
The provision would prohibit states from regulating AI if they wish to access federal broadband expansion funds through the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program. Senator Ted Cruz (R., Texas), who is leading the charge for the freeze, has defended it as necessary to avoid uneven and burdensome regulations. Cruz told NR, “History has shown that this light-touch regulatory approach to new technologies has been incredibly successful in promoting American innovation and jobs. We would be wise to continue following a proven model within our investment of federal dollars.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R., S.D.) also came out in defense of the provision. A quote provided to NR said, “We want to be the leaders in AI and quantum and all these new technologies. And the way to do that is not to come in with a heavy hand of government, it’s to come in with a light touch.” This is generally correct, as harshly regulating artificial intelligence could give adversaries such as China an upper hand and would paralyze the development of new technologies.
Thune acknowledged that the internet has long had some regulatory framework and did not rule out future regulation of AI. He pointed to a bill he introduced with Senator Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.) that provided safeguards and standards for AI. “At some point, I’m hoping we will legislate on this issue, because I think it’s bipartisan, and I think there are enough equities that both sides have in this,” he said.
Some federal regulations of AI are already in place. For example, the TAKE IT DOWN Act prohibits the distribution of nonconsensual AI-generated sexual images.
Senator Josh Hawley (R., Mo.) criticized the proposed AI regulation freeze as “a huge giveaway to some of the worst corporate actors out there,” and other Republicans have expressed serious concerns about the plan. For example, Tennessee would be unable to enforce a law that protects individuals from the unauthorized use of their image and voice.
AI comes with serious ethical concerns that society is just beginning to deal with the ramifications of, whether it is students using Grok to cheat on an exam or filmmakers using Flow to make movies. Many jobs that have historically been free from fears of being replaced by automation no longer have such comfort. Writers, lawyers, or even some medical professionals may soon see AI advance to a point where it can perform their jobs for them.
Simply turning a blind eye to the harmful effects of the technology would be dangerous. The policy approach taken by the federal government needs to carefully weigh the importance of AI for the economy and national defense against the serious cost it will have on many people’s lives. Freezing state regulations on AI makes sense to avoid an inconsistent regulatory environment, but “light touch” federal regulations should be pursued soon.
Hawley’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment from NR.