In the development of the US artificial intelligence industry policy, the"Limiting State-Level AI Regulation" Amendment, but was ultimately rejected by the U.S. Senate with an overwhelming vote of 7 to 1 on July 99, which means that U.S. states can continue to independently legislate and regulate artificial intelligence in the next decade. The impact on the artificial intelligence industry and local governance is worthy of attention.
The proposal originated from an amendment proposed by U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, who originally intended to include the clause in the new tax reform bill promoted by the Trump administration, which mentioned that state governments that receive federal artificial intelligence infrastructure funds shall not formulate artificial intelligence-related regulatory laws in the next ten years. However, this move has triggered a strong backlash from both the ruling and opposition parties and state representatives, who are worried that the federal government will deprive local regulatory autonomy by means of funding hijacking.
Although in the final version, Senator Marsha Blackburn coordinated to shorten the ban to five years and included exceptions for child safety, deceptive behavior, and personal portraits, voices, names, and even specifically excluded the ELVIS Act (used to prohibit the unauthorized use of musicians' voices and images in artificial intelligence applications) that had been passed by Tennessee, it still failed to dispel other lawmakers' doubts about this provision.
As the pressure increased, some Republican members who had previously expressed support gradually withdrew their original positions. Marsha Blackburn eventually withdrew her support for the bill before the vote, and Ted Cruz himself agreed to delete this clause, indicating that his momentum for promoting the bill has completely disappeared.
This veto means that the future regulation of artificial intelligence in the United States will still be dominated by state governments, and each state can independently formulate relevant regulations based on local industry needs and social values. Against the backdrop of the rapid penetration of artificial intelligence applications into content creation, education, finance, and justice, this open governance model will result in differences in regulations and compliance costs for companies, but it also reflects a policy consensus on local management of emerging technologies.
Currently, the United States is still in the early stages of exploration in the formulation of artificial intelligence regulations. The Senate’s veto will leave more room for states to maneuver. Whether an effective and balanced regulatory system can be established in the future is worthy of continued attention.
