“We must … be humble and acknowledge that there is much we as members of Congress don’t know about [ artificial intelligence ],” Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) said recently while announcing the National AI Commission Act alongside Reps. Ken Buck (R-CO) and Anna Eshoo (D-CA).

While it’s wise to know what you don’t know, it’s equally important that our lawmakers don’t hand over the policymaking reins to “experts” who stand to gain from shaping rules and regulations in their own favor. The humility for which Lieu advocates must be balanced with healthy skepticism.

These so-called experts already wield too much power over the regulatory process. A recent investigation , for example, revealed the enormous power and influence that Eric Schmidt, Google’s former CEO, has wielded over America’s policy approach to emerging technologies, including AI. Under the guise of altruism, Schmidt has abused government advisory roles, as well as more than 500 connections to decision-makers, businesses, charities, academia, government boards, and more, to further his own financial interests related to spectrum, semiconductors, biotechnology, and AI, to name a few. Case in point: Schmidt and Innovation Endeavors, just one of the several venture capital funds that he founded, made at least 57 investments in AI companies while Schmidt was running the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, according to Crunchbase data.

In short, Schmidt has been stacking the political deck via giant donations in exchange for political appointments, promotion of his own business interests through government-issued reports, the winning of federal contracts through exploitation of his relationships, and his writing of self-serving policies to be passed into law. In fact, in 2010, he boasted to the Atlantic editor James Bennet at the Washington Ideas Forum that “the average American doesn't realize how much of the laws are written by lobbyists. … It's shocking how the system actually works."

This manipulation is important to keep in mind as lawmakers consider how to deal with emerging AI technology. The National AI Commission Act, and its companion Senate bill that was introduced by Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), would establish a 20-person commission from across academia, civil society, government, and the tech industry to advise policymakers in Washington on recommended regulations for AI. The commission would be asked to deliver three reports on the subject over a period not to exceed two years.

The breadth of the proposed commission is a good start, but to ensure the integrity of this advisory committee, a vetting process needs to precede the selection of commission members.

It seems like this would be a given, right? No. To use Schmidt as an example again: The former Google CEO has served on several government advisory commissions, even though financial disclosures, tax records, business documents, and other publicly available information that make clear his conflicts of interest were right under lawmakers’ noses.

Key government leaders even sounded the alarm on ethics issues related to Schmidt’s advisory roles. Walter Shaub, the former director of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, described Schmidt’s selection to serve on the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology in January 2023 as a “potential horror show” due to Schmidt’s ability to shape biotech policy in ways that could benefit his own financial interests. Schmidt has played America like a deck of cards.

We can’t let this happen again. To avoid political corruption, transparency safeguards must be put in place within advisory bodies, and those who could benefit from the policy on which they would consult must be eliminated from consideration. For the National AI Commission and other policy-shaping committees advising Washington, America needs members who push what’s best for America, without any thought of what’s best for themselves.

People don’t want to believe that they live under the “rule of the few,” but allowing “experts” to dictate our laws results in just that. Diversifying the proposed National Commission on Artificial Intelligence is a great first step, but our leaders must institute another layer of protection against insider policymaking.

Aiden Buzzetti is the president of the Bull Moose Project, which is based in Washington, D.C.