A single line tucked into an enormous legislative package is shaking up Washington.
Lawmakers are locked in a heated debate over whether states should be barred from creating their own rules for artificial intelligence for the next decade. Supporters, including some top Republicans, argue that allowing Washington alone to handle AI oversight will help the country compete with China and halt a confusing tangle of state-by-state regulations.
Senator Ted Cruz is an avid backer, drawing comparisons to the 1990s when the internet surged forward under a loose, hands-off approach in Washington. Not everyone in the Republican ranks agrees.
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has grown vocal in her opposition, declaring on X that giving AI technology unchecked freedom for ten years could be a serious mistake. She insists she did not know about the state restriction when she supported the bill’s earlier version last month.
If the rule sticks, Greene is promising to oppose the measure when it returns to the House.
States’ Rights and Tech Industry Collide
Senator Josh Hawley has also jumped into the fray, voicing concern about the impact on federalism. “I would think that, just as a matter of federalism, we’d want states to be able to try out different regimes that they think will work for their state,” Hawley said. He questioned whether it’s wise to tie every state’s hands while technology evolves at breakneck speed.
The White House has avoided saying where it stands on the issue. Former President Trump, whose name is tied to the bill’s title, has been silent as well.
Democrats have signaled their own discomfort, with Senator Chris Murphy warning that the move is a giant handout to tech companies. The giant bill could force any state that dares to pass or enforce AI rules to give up millions in federal broadband funds, at least according to the Senate’s latest version.
The largest technology companies have cheered this federal preemption of state power, eager for clear and unified rules. But not everyone in Silicon Valley is convinced a decade of blanket deregulation is the answer.
Dario Amodei, chief executive of Anthropic, called the plan “far too blunt an instrument.” In his own words, “Without a clear plan for a federal response, a moratorium would give us the worst of both worlds — no ability for states to act, and no national policy as a backstop.”
The Senate could still pull the restriction from the bill, and all eyes are now on possible amendments in the coming days. Final passage is expected to come quickly, with further congressional debate over AI regulation possible before the legislation lands on Trump’s desk.
