Will Congress regulate the increasing use of AI?

Artificial intelligence is what makes predicting the future possible, not magic.

Should we ask AI when Congress might regulate emerging technology before it becomes uncontrollable?

Congressional leaders are pushing for a bill regulating AI, but the path to approval and agreement on AI guardrails is uncertain.

Last year, Chuck Schumer, the Senate Majority Leader and a Democrat from New York, pledged to take legislative action on AI.

Schumer stated that it should not be days or weeks, but not years either. It will fall under the category of months.

The New York Democrat organized several AI conferences on Capitol Hill, where senators were informed about the potential benefits and risks of AI technology. Schumer invited prominent tech leaders and pioneers, including Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and Sam Altman, the founder of OpenAI, to share their insights.

At that time, Altman stated that the current moment was crucial, urgent, and unprecedented, and he believed the government should take the lead.

New technologies often lack clear guidelines and principles from Congress.

Samuel Morse, the inventor of Morse Code and developer of the telegraph, showcased his new-fangled system to the federal government in Washington in the 1840s. He demonstrated how to dispatch signals and messages down the line by stretching a wire between two rooms at the Capitol. Morse then strung a telegraph line from Washington to Baltimore in 1844 for a private showing of the technology to Washington power brokers. Morse transmitted the words "What hath God wrought" from the Supreme Court chamber inside the Capitol. However, the federal government didn't buy it, which partly explains why there has always been private control of telecommunications in the U.S. compared to other nations.

And that is precisely what Congress "hath wrought."

In the 1920s and 1930s, Congress intervened in the new phenomenon called "radio" by lifting restrictions on power, wattage, and footprint. However, the signals of various broadcasters interfered with one another, prompting the broadcasters to appeal to Congress for regulation through legislation. This marked the start of federal telecommunications policy.

In the 1990s, lawmakers struggled to regulate the internet, which was then referred to as "the information superhighway." There were concerns about protecting free speech and promoting innovation. Despite this, Congress passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, a significant piece of legislation. However, some lawmakers may want to revisit this legislation today in light of the current state of the digital landscape.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La, stated that there is great potential and possibility with this, but also some danger.

Conservatives, including Johnson, are cautious about the government restricting AI's potential.

"Johnson stated that he believes in Reagan's principle of less government being the solution and that government is the problem itself. He emphasized the importance of being careful when it comes to overregulating AI, as it could stifle innovation."

Johnson and others argue that the European Union went too far earlier this year with its approval of an AI regulation bill, which is the first comprehensive legal framework on AI globally. The EU law identifies four areas of risk associated with using AI. Under the EU's legislation, "unacceptable risk" is prohibited, which refers to the exploitation of someone's vulnerabilities based on their race, disability, or social status through AI. There is concern that AI could use biometric data to categorize people, which could manipulate them through subtle techniques. This could lead to dangerous conclusions or harmful actions, as people engage with AI.

The EU aims to establish uniformity among AI systems entering the market, thereby providing a fair and equal playing field for AI users.

Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va., is pursuing a master's degree in AI at George Mason University. He believes that it is not only free-market conservatives like Johnson who wish to reduce the government's influence on AI.

Beyer stated that none of us want to replicate the European Union's AI act, which we perceive as highly regulatory and prescriptive. Instead, we aim for a more relaxed approach that maintains America's position as a hub for innovation, imagination, and creativity.

But Beyer offers a note of caution.

Beyer stated that regulation may be required due to the presence of bad actors.

Beyer is not concerned about the speed of passing legislation.

Beyer stated that social media reaction is much faster than what they have been able to respond to in the past. They have done very little in terms of privacy legislation, with a major privacy bill still pending. There has never been a real Privacy Act in American history.

Last year, the House established an AI task force, with Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., serving as one of the co-chairs. He believes that people should not be afraid of AI.

Unfortunately, AI is often perceived as a threat to humanity due to its portrayal in 50 years of science fiction and pop culture. As a result, the average American may believe that the biggest downside potential of AI is an army of evil robots taking over the world, which is not the case.

Obernolte is concerned about the potential of AI to spread misinformation, violate data privacy, and make malicious financial transactions without consent.

"An army of evil robots is probably equally consequential as all the things that keep us up at night," conceded Obernolte.

But can Congress act before AI does?

"During the Republican tenure in Congress, we've faced difficulties in maintaining essential services," said Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., the other co-chairman of the AI task force.

A report is due from the AI task force later this year.

What legislative solutions might lawmakers offer? Can Congress pass a bill? Will the outcome of the election impact these possibilities?

Unclear.

But perhaps ask AI.