Congressional leaders in both the House and Senate are actively negotiating a deal to address the mounting concerns surrounding artificial intelligence (AI). As AI rapidly integrates into various sectors, including politics and national security, lawmakers are pushing for a legislative solution, and many hope to move a bill forward during the upcoming lame-duck session. This period, the stretch between the November elections and the swearing-in of newly elected officials, presents a narrow window for significant policy shifts, often resulting in a flurry of last-minute dealmaking.
Two individuals close to the ongoing negotiations have confirmed that discussions between Democratic and Republican leaders are well underway. However, the specifics of any potential AI-related legislation remain in flux as lawmakers grapple over areas of potential agreement and points of contention.
AI has become an integral part of everyday life, and its presence in politics and elections has only heightened scrutiny. AI’s potential to drive innovation is widely acknowledged, but so too are the risks it poses, particularly in areas like misinformation, national security, and election integrity. As a result, lawmakers have prioritized finding a balanced approach to regulation — one that promotes technological growth while addressing the associated risks.
AI has been a key issue for Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who has spearheaded efforts to create a legislative roadmap. Schumer, alongside a bipartisan group of lawmakers, released an “AI policy roadmap” earlier this year that outlines various recommendations for managing AI’s impact. The New York Democrat has been particularly vocal about the need for a comprehensive regulatory framework to safeguard against the technology’s potential misuse, especially in the realms of deep-fake videos, political misinformation, and identity theft.
The urgency of addressing AI risks is further compounded by the rapidly approaching 2024 elections. As AI-generated misinformation grows more sophisticated, it has become easier to create realistic fake content that mimics political candidates, potentially influencing voter behavior. This has raised alarms about the integrity of future elections, especially as the spread of AI-generated “deep-fakes” and other manipulations becomes harder to detect.
While both parties seem aligned on the need for some form of AI regulation, the road ahead is not without obstacles. Lawmakers from both sides have found common ground on certain aspects of AI regulation, particularly in relation to workforce training and AI research. Several bipartisan bills addressing these issues have already passed through committees and may form the foundation of any forthcoming legislation.
However, as with most major policy issues, there are areas that are proving more difficult to navigate. AI’s role in elections and its potential impact on national security remains a sticking point for negotiators, as these issues are more likely to spark partisan disagreements. Democrats, for instance, are more focused on regulating AI’s role in preventing the spread of misinformation and safeguarding democratic processes. Republicans, on the other hand, are concerned about over-regulation and the potential stifling of innovation. Some members of the GOP are also wary of regulatory overreach, preferring a lighter-touch approach that prioritizes free-market principles.
In addition to these hurdles, the cost of implementing comprehensive AI reforms is another major consideration. Any sweeping AI legislation would likely require substantial government funding, which could prove a difficult sell as Congress continues to battle over budgetary constraints. With many conservatives pushing for more stringent cuts to federal spending, lawmakers may find themselves at odds over how to fund the necessary initiatives to regulate AI effectively.
Schumer has played a leading role in rallying bipartisan support for AI-related legislation. Alongside Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Todd Young (R-Ind.), and Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), Schumer has helped develop the aforementioned AI policy roadmap that has guided much of the current discussion. The group has also hosted several “AI Insight Forums,” where lawmakers across the political spectrum were briefed on the rapid development of AI technology, as well as its potential threats.
These forums were designed to provide lawmakers with a more comprehensive understanding of AI’s impact, with experts offering insights into both the positive and negative applications of the technology. The goal was to inform policymakers so they can craft legislation that not only addresses the immediate risks posed by AI but also lays the groundwork for long-term innovation and growth.
Schumer has been pushing committee chairs to advance legislation aimed at regulating AI, but time is running out. Congress returns to session following the November election, and with less than two months remaining before the start of a new legislative term, lawmakers will need to act quickly if they hope to pass any significant AI-related bills during the lame-duck period.
Lame-duck sessions are known for their unique challenges. With the results of the November elections fresh in mind, outgoing members of Congress may have little incentive to pass major legislation, while newly elected members will not yet have the opportunity to weigh in. Furthermore, the potential for shifts in party control in both the House and Senate could impact what gets passed during this period.
For example, if Republicans gain control of one or both chambers, some members may prefer to delay any significant AI legislation in the hopes of securing more favorable terms in the next Congress. The same dynamic could apply to members of the Democratic party if they anticipate a more favorable balance of power following the elections. As a result, the timing of the lame-duck session presents both opportunities for compromise and the risk of legislative inaction.
In addition to AI regulation, Congress will also need to address several other critical issues during this period, including government funding. Lawmakers must pass a government funding bill by mid-December to avoid a shutdown, and it is likely that any AI package could be included as part of a larger spending bill or tacked onto other must-pass legislation, such as the National Defense Authorization Act.
As negotiations continue in Congress, the positions of the 2024 presidential candidates will also play a role in shaping the debate over AI regulation. Former President Donald Trump, for instance, has expressed skepticism about the need for heavy-handed regulations. He has advocated for a free-market approach to AI development, emphasizing the importance of “free speech and human flourishing” in shaping policy decisions. Trump has also vowed to repeal a broad executive order signed by President Joe Biden last year, which aimed to enhance AI safety standards.
On the other hand, Vice President Kamala Harris has taken a more proactive stance on AI regulation. Harris, who served as attorney general in the tech-heavy state of California, has long been an advocate for balancing innovation with consumer protection. She has expressed concern over the potential risks of AI, particularly in terms of misinformation and data privacy, while also recognizing the importance of supporting technological advancements.
The Biden administration has signaled its openness to additional regulation of AI. The president’s executive order on AI safety standards marked a significant step toward regulating the emerging technology, and it is likely that any AI legislation passed by Congress would align with the administration’s broader goals. However, with the 2024 election looming, the evolving positions of the candidates could influence how aggressively Congress moves forward with AI regulation in the coming months.
The internal dynamics within the House Republican caucus could also complicate efforts to pass AI legislation. Depending on the results of the November elections, House Republicans may face a leadership battle, which could impact their willingness to move on major pieces of legislation. The outcome of this leadership contest, combined with Trump’s position on AI regulation, could further complicate the GOP’s stance on AI legislation.
If Trump-aligned members of the House GOP gain more influence following the elections, it is possible that efforts to regulate AI could face greater resistance, particularly if they view such regulations as an unnecessary government intrusion into the tech sector.
