Obernolte Still Sees Need for Congress to Set AI Regulatory ‘Lanes’
There remains a need for the federal government to establish “lanes” limiting how states can regulate AI technology, Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., told reporters Wednesday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Co-author of the House Republican-proposed AI moratorium (see 2507010071), Obernolte said the proposal was never intended to be a long-term solution, just an opportunity for the federal government to act first and set boundaries. He spoke with reporters after appearing on a panel at the Business Software Alliance’s Transform event in Washington.
“Both states and the federal government are going to have lanes in AI regulation, but we need to establish at the federal level what those lanes are,” he said when asked about reviving the failed moratorium. “Otherwise you get 50 different states going in 50 different directions.”
Obernolte noted that the government shutdown is preventing Congress from moving forward with legislative proposals, including his Creating Resources for Every American To Experiment with Artificial Intelligence (Create AI) Act.
Industry groups, in recent comments to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, urged the Trump administration to work with Congress to preempt AI regulations at the state level (see 2510290032).
During the BSA panel, Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., who co-chaired the House AI Task Force with Obernolte, questioned industry talking points about compliance complications for businesses operating AI systems across state and international lines.
Docusign Chief Information Security Officer Michael Adams told the audience his company serves more than 1 billion customers across more than 180 countries, which involves hundreds of millions of contracts. A “disparate patchwork of regulations” makes it “very difficult” to innovate and invest, he said. Lieu asked Adams how Docusign complies with regulations from more than 180 jurisdictions.
“Sometimes one at a time, unfortunately,” said Adams. However, Docusign generally tries to adapt to “leading frameworks” like the GDPR and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).
Some regulators are “more aggressive, and we have to account for that,” he said.
During the panel, Obernolte called for light-touch regulation that protects against the “malicious” threats associated with AI. Lieu agreed with Obernolte's point about balancing business and consumer interests. Lieu noted the Task Force’s final report included more than 80 bipartisan recommendations, many of which he said could be translated into legislation.
The items deserve floor time in the House, said Lieu. He argued that AI developers and deployers most importantly need to adhere to testing and disclosure requirements to mitigate the risks associated with AI systems “going rogue.”
“If we set out to regulate for the sake of regulating, then we’re on a fool’s errand,” said Obernolte. State regulation is “appropriate” because states have their own regulatory right, but on the other hand, the federal government, based on Article I of the Constitution, is tasked with setting regulations for interstate commerce, he said.
Congress needs to draw “interstate guardrails” and decide what’s preempted by federal law, while allowing states to regulate and be the “laboratories of democracy,” Obernolte said. Ultimately, the federal government “has to go first,” said the Republican, adding state legislatures are “already out ahead on this issue.”