White House fields feedback on AI red tape
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Lindsey Bailey/Axios
The White House is now sifting through hundreds of comments on AI regulation from industry and outside groups as it decides how to cut as much red tape as possible.
Why it matters: The Trump administration is touting this effort to cut barriers to AI development and deployment as key to the president's AI action plan.
The big picture: With this request for information from the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the tech and AI industry had a chance to tell the government what not to regulate in a twist on traditional lobbying.
- The industry embraced it fully.
What they're saying: Many industry groups and some think tanks — including the Chamber of Commerce, the R Street Institute and the Consumer Technology Association — pushed for:
- Preempting the patchwork of state AI laws
- Faster permitting for data centers and broadband
- Leveraging existing standards and rules instead of creating new ones
NetChoice called for the removal of the Biden administration's voluntary commitments, once enthusiastically signed by many tech companies, because of "vague and subjective terminology" on policy areas already covered by existing law.
- NetChoice said it's "impossibly vague" to figure out what counts as bias and that the Civil Rights Act, Fair Housing Act, and Americans with Disabilities Act already make it illegal to use AI for discrimination.
- The Chamber of Commerce warned against exporting to competitors "to avoid situations where sensitive technologies" get in the wrong hands and undermine "national security objectives."
- The American Hospital Association specifically wants stronger Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act preemption.
Friction point: OSTP says AI can be hampered by "regulatory mismatch" or requirements that are based on "human-centered assumptions" like mandatory human supervision or documentation practices.
- The Center for Democracy and Technology warned against civil rights laws getting caught up in OSTP's definition of a regulatory mismatch.
- CDT said that in addition to reaffirming civil rights law, OSTP should mandate independent audits for high-risk AI systems, such as those used in housing, lending, employment, public benefits and services, or criminal justice.
Groups also disagreed on copyright.
- While the center-right R Street wants the administration to recognize AI training as fair use, the News/Media Alliance called on the administration to promote licensing agreements.
The bottom line: It's not a big mystery where the administration's thinking on AI was at before it got all of these comments — an approach that centers deregulation and a preemptive federal standard is set to come out on top.
