ai-safety policy regulations ai-regulation ai-policy us-congress gov

Share this with friends, journalists and politicians

States should retain the right to set stricter AI safety standards than the federal government

Key insights

Many quotes on both sides call for stronger AI guardrails and a meaningful federal role; the main divide is whether federal standards should supplement or replace state action.
Supporters of state authority repeatedly emphasize urgent harms to children, workers, consumers, public safety, and local infrastructure, while opponents emphasize interstate compliance burdens, startup costs, and global competition.
A recurring middle position favors a federal baseline with room for stricter state rules, sometimes alongside narrow preemption in specific issue areas.
The quotes show a split within technology and policy circles themselves, with some industry voices welcoming state leadership and others warning that state-by-state regulation would undermine innovation.
State officials and attorneys general often stress enforcement authority and tailoring rules to local needs, while federal officials and some members of Congress more often stress national uniformity across borders.

Arguments for

State action cannot wait

Supporters say frontier AI poses urgent risks to children, workers, communities, and critical systems, and states cannot wait for Washington when federal guardrails are absent, weak, or delayed. In that view, states have a responsibility to step in now to protect residents while AI adoption accelerates.

Frontier AI models pose major risks to our communities and our economy. This is a literal life-or-death issue. The best way to mitigate those risks is to implement smart guardrails that hold the biggest AI developers to strict safety and transparency standards. If the federal gov…

Andrew Gounardes · Sep 30, 2026 · full quote
While oversight and regulation would be strongest and most effective at the federal level, President Trump continues to dismiss the need for even the most basic guardrails. States, in the meantime, must act with more urgency and do everything possible to manage how AI is impactin…

Tina Kotek · Sep 23, 2026 · full quote
As AI systems become more powerful and the federal government is unwilling to step in, states have a responsibility to protect our people from the dangers of AI while still harnessing the unique potential of the technology. People want protections from the risks of AI and Illinoi…

JB Pritzker · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote
We can no longer wait for Washington, D.C. to do the right thing and enact protections over these digital tools that give parents more control—it is time for the states to take action. This bill strikes a good balance between protecting children, ensuring workers are being treate…

Ned Lamont · Jun 2, 2026 · full quote
The federal government has a unique leadership role that they have to play and that includes both the White House and Congress. In the absence of that, the governors cannot just sit on our hands.

Wes Moore · Oct 1, 2026 · full quote

Federal floor, not ceiling

Many supporters welcome national guardrails, but argue federal law should set minimum protections rather than block stronger state rules. They also want state officials to retain authority to enforce both state laws and new federal protections.

The first is a federal governance framework targeting frontier AI developers above $500 million in annual revenue. These developers would be required to publish safety frameworks, report critical incidents, and submit to semi-annual third-party audits. [...] The right answer is a…

Sarmad Ali · Oct 7, 2026 · full quote
Attorney General Brown and the coalition are calling on Congress to take immediate action to ensure AI development does not lead to irreversible damage or further unlawful behavior. [...] Any AI regulatory scheme considered by Congress must include: [...] A prohibition on preempt…

Anthony G. Brown · Sep 25, 2026 · full quote
A federal regulatory framework for frontier AI [...] must include: [...] Explicit preservation of state authority to enact and enforce more protective state laws applicable to AI and providing state officials with full authority to enforce any new federal statutes.

California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General · Sep 24, 2026 · full quote
NCSL strongly opposes any attempt by Congress, federal agencies or the administration to preempt state laws or undermine state authority over AI policy. [...] Federal laws and regulations in the AI space should establish a strong baseline of protections that uphold individual dat…

National Conference of State Legislatures · Jul 2026 · full quote
We need meaningful safeguards on AI to address the harms they cause. That is why we cannot tell states to stand down from protecting their kids, especially when we need Congress to put standards in place. [...] I think we need to be very loud and clear that the federal government…

Maria Cantwell · Jan 15, 2026 · full quote

Laboratories for governance

Proponents argue states can test audits, transparency rules, and other approaches tailored to local conditions. Those experiments can create templates for other states and help inform a later national framework rather than be frozen by broad preemption.

While we have been very clear that the federal government remains well-positioned to lead on frontier safety because it has the resources, expertise and institutions, we also strongly actually see a position for both Illinois but also California and New York to really lead in adv…

Caitlin Niedermeyer · Jul 7, 2026 · full quote
States can and should experiment with regulation, standard-setting, public-private partnerships, public goals–conditioned funding, and other efforts to protect their citizens from AI’s downsides and ensure they capture its upsides.

Alondra Nelson · 2026 · full quote
The federal government should establish baseline national standards for areas such as security, privacy, civil rights, transparency, and interstate consistency. States should retain flexibility to address implementation, public sector use, and issues unique to their citizens and …

Robert Fulk · Jul 2026 · full quote
States need time to discern the risks and opportunities of this constantly evolving technology, and they must remain free to engage in an iterative process that could help inform and strengthen our federal response.

Nat Purser · Mar 24, 2026 · full quote
SB 315 passed with overwhelming bi-partisan support because lawmakers recognize the same basic truth: the public demands safety and transparency from the AI companies shaping their future. Illinois has created a new template for responsible AI governance that we expect other stat…

Steve Wimmer · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote

Accountability against self-policing

Another line of argument is that preemption would leave powerful AI companies largely policing themselves in the absence of adequate national rules. Supporters say preserving state authority keeps open avenues for oversight, liability, and accountability when harms emerge.

AI carries enormous risks that we should not ignore by allowing big tech to regulate itself. Congress needs to exercise its oversight duty and create guardrails for this technology before these powerful systems cause irreparable harm to our global infrastructure. I stand with my …

Dana Nessel · Sep 24, 2026 · full quote
The federal government must not grant tech giants a blank check to deploy these technologies without the oversight of states.

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
Any legislative framework that includes federal preemption without meaningful guardrails isn’t serious about protecting Americans. It’s just another handout to Big Tech at the expense of our kids, our communities, and our jobs.

Michael Kleinman · Mar 22, 2026 · full quote
Preemption would effectively mean no U.S. regulation of AI at all, with the narrow exception of rules to deal with nonconsensual intimate deepfakes, because there are no national rules in place. [...] To be clear, states aren't keeping up with the risks that Big Tech companies ar…

Robert Weissman · 2026 · full quote
After witnessing the harmful impact of the tech industry's move-fast-break-things mantra during the rise of social media platforms, the public wants safeguards now. What's most disturbing is that the framework recommends both banning state laws on AI and urges Congress not to cre…

Brad Carson · 2026 · full quote
White House AI czar David Sacks continues to do the bidding of Big Tech at the expense of regular, hardworking Americans. This federal AI framework seeks to prevent states from legislating on AI and provides no path to accountability for AI developers for the harms caused by thei…

Brendan Steinhauser · 2026 · full quote

Arguments against

Avoid compliance patchwork

Opponents argue that allowing each state to impose its own AI rules would force companies to navigate conflicting definitions, reporting duties, and legal regimes across the country. They say this raises costs and complexity for firms operating across state lines, especially smaller companies and startups.

Importantly, this framework can succeed only if it is applied uniformly across the United States. A patchwork of conflicting state laws would undermine American innovation and our ability to lead in the global AI race.

The White House · Mar 20, 2026 · full quote
If you have to report to 50 different state regulators at 50 different times with 50 different definitions, it's extremely onerous. And it's going to slow down innovation, and it's going to hinder our progress in the AI race.

David Sacks · 2025 · full quote
Creating a patchwork of AI laws where 50 different states all have different goals is ultimately going to hurt little tech and startups more than anyone else.

Michael Kratsios · 2026 · full quote
At the same time, some states and localities are moving ahead independently with their own AI regulations. New York, California, Colorado, and others have begun implementing policies intended to address privacy, discrimination, and other workforce concerns. However, some have rai…

Ryan Mackenzie · Apr 15, 2026 · full quote
Congress has an opportunity to foster this innovation by adopting a regulatory approach that is careful, deliberate, and grounded in the realities of wage and hour compliance. That means resisting the temptation to impose prescriptive mandates that would stifle the development an…

Matthew Gizzo · Apr 15, 2026 · full quote
Rather than allow protections to exist in only a handful of states or force innovators to navigate dozens of different legal regimes, our framework would establish one national standard.

Jay Obernolte · 2026 · full quote

Protect national competitiveness

Another argument is that fragmented state regulation could slow deployment, burden U.S. firms, and weaken the country's position in the global AI race. From this perspective, a single national framework is needed to support innovation, jobs, and security while still providing guardrails.

America should lead the world in artificial intelligence, not regulate ourselves into falling behind China through a patchwork of fifty different state laws.

Erin Houchin · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
Instead of pushing AI amnesty, President Trump rightfully called on Congress to pass federal standards and protections to solve the patchwork of state laws that has hindered AI innovation. Now, Congress must answer his call to establish one federal rulebook for AI to protect chil…

Marsha Blackburn · Mar 18, 2026 · full quote
“Like it or not, artificial intelligence is here to stay. The U.S. can choose to lead the world in this transformative technology or we can regulate it into the hands of Communist China. If we care about American jobs, national security and staying ahead of our foreign adversarie…

Gabe Evans · Feb 19, 2026 · full quote
The United States cannot remain competitive if developers, businesses, and users face fifty different legal regimes governing a general-purpose technology. [...] Congress should take this recommendation seriously and establish a light-touch national framework that preserves room …

Daniel Castro · 2026 · full quote
Preempting state AI laws would prevent regulatory fragmentation and enable the innovation America needs to compete in the global AI race, while allowing existing laws and regulations that are flexible enough to govern AI effectively to continue to do so.

Ash Johnson · Jun 10, 2026 · full quote
“Artificial intelligence is already transforming economies across the globe, and it’s not going away. The question is not whether AI will shape the future, it’s who will set the standards that govern its development and use. The United States is best positioned to establish stron…

Nick Langworthy · Feb 19, 2026 · full quote

State rules may misfire

Some critics contend that state AI bills can rely on subjective judgments, unclear guardrails, or even ideological objectives. They argue that standalone state frameworks may impose burdens without clear safety benefits and can hamper beneficial AI development.

Some state laws seek to impose their own patchwork of regulations on AI. Colorado’s Artificial Intelligence Act, for instance, appears to coerce companies into altering the output of their AI models to comply with and advance the state’s ideological objectives.

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) · Jul 7, 2026 · full quote
We remain concerned that Illinois would effectively be requiring private actors to make highly subjective determinations requiring AI safety compliance without established national standards, certifications, or clear regulatory guardrails.

Ninia Linero · May 20, 2026 · full quote
[The bill] would create a standalone state framework that increases compliance burdens without delivering clear safety benefits.

Tom Mann · Feb 10, 2026 · full quote
I'm disappointed [the Big Beautiful Bill] didn't include a proposed moratorium on U.S. state-level AI regulation. While there is a role for AI regulation, it is when the technology is new and poorly understood that lobbyists are most likely to succeed at pushing through anti-comp…

Andrew Ng · 2026 · full quote
States should check their regulatory impulses and adopt the federal approach of accelerating better development and faster deployment of this general-purpose technology.

Nate Karren · Jan 30, 2026 · full quote

One national rulebook

Some opponents maintain that AI is a border-spanning, general-purpose technology best governed through one federal rulebook rather than separate state standards, and some would pair that national framework with federal safe harbors from state liability. In their view, Congress and federal institutions should establish consistent transparency, safety, and accountability requirements.

The FRONTIER Act is a targeted bill with clear, uniform transparency, and safety standards, instead of a fifty-state patchwork. I'm glad to support this bipartisan effort so that Congress acts before this technology outruns us.

Scott Peters · Jul 23, 2026 · full quote
If safety is the priority, such a national standard is the best policy approach to ensure the US continues to lead in innovation and not be undermined by a patchwork of regulations.

OpenAI · Jul 15, 2026 · full quote
We obviously strongly, strongly believe AI doesn’t stop at state borders and AI policies shouldn’t either. So we really need explicit, federal preemption of conflicting state laws — one national standard.

Amy Bos · Mar 3, 2026 · full quote
I think federal pre-emption is something that should be part of it.

Andrew R. Garbarino · Jun 28, 2026 · full quote
Companies’ AI models earn federal preemption — a safe harbor from liability under state law for a specific category of risk — if they meet or exceed CAISI’s determination of industry best practices for cybersecurity, human safety, privacy and the like.

Sam Liccardo · May 22, 2026 · full quote

Middle ground

Federal lead, state role

Several quotes say federal oversight would likely be strongest because national institutions have greater resources and a nationwide reach, yet they also reject sidelining states. They describe state initiatives as complementary, especially while federal standards are incomplete, and potentially useful in shaping national direction.

While oversight and regulation would be strongest and most effective at the federal level, President Trump continues to dismiss the need for even the most basic guardrails. States, in the meantime, must act with more urgency and do everything possible to manage how AI is impactin…

Tina Kotek · Sep 23, 2026 · full quote
While we have been very clear that the federal government remains well-positioned to lead on frontier safety because it has the resources, expertise and institutions, we also strongly actually see a position for both Illinois but also California and New York to really lead in adv…

Caitlin Niedermeyer · Jul 7, 2026 · full quote
Here in New York, we've stepped up, setting a national standard for transparency and accountability for frontier AI models. But states cannot solve this problem alone. The federal government must establish strong national standards that put public safety ahead of the race to deve…

Kathy Hochul · Sep 9, 2026 · full quote
At the same time, the rapid pace of AI development raises serious concerns about safety, accountability, privacy, civil rights, the future of work, and public trust. We cannot allow this technology to move faster than our ability to put appropriate safeguards in place, and we can…

Maura Healey · Sep 18, 2026 · full quote
The federal government has a unique leadership role that they have to play and that includes both the White House and Congress. In the absence of that, the governors cannot just sit on our hands.

Wes Moore · Oct 1, 2026 · full quote

Targeted preemption only

A narrower position accepts that preemption may be appropriate in specific, clearly defined areas such as national-security-related risks or other issue-by-issue contexts. But it rejects broad, vague displacement of state authority across AI as a whole.

Federal preemption of state AI laws should proceed on a narrow, issue-by-issue basis. Broad preemption of a vaguely defined and poorly understood category of state laws would, in all likelihood, be a disaster, for both political and policy reasons.

Charlie Bullock · Jul 8, 2026 · full quote
Outside of areas with a clear national security nexus, namely cybersecurity, CBRNE, and loss of control, states should retain the ability to legislate without federal interference. Unless and until Congress enacts and implements a truly strong federal framework, states should ret…

Iskandar Haykel · Jul 27, 2026 · full quote
The federal government should establish baseline national standards for areas such as security, privacy, civil rights, transparency, and interstate consistency. States should retain flexibility to address implementation, public sector use, and issues unique to their citizens and …

Robert Fulk · Jul 2026 · full quote

Across the quotes, there is broad support for stronger AI guardrails and a significant federal role. The sharp disagreement is over preemption: supporters of state authority see it as a necessary backstop, enforcement tool, and source of policy learning, while opponents see uniform national rules as essential for consistency, innovation, and competitiveness. A notable middle position favors a strong federal baseline with limited, carefully targeted preemption rather than blanket displacement of state standards.

Cast Your Vote:

Results (140 votes):

Total (140 votes)

For 111 (79%) Abstain 0 (0%) Against 29 (21%)

New Top

For (111)

Patty Murray
U.S. Senator from Washington and Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

“At minimum, over in Congress, we need to think about a floor of basic, bipartisan guardrails the entire country can get behind... [H]e tried to rename it, and threatened states’ funding if they dare to regulate it. ... There’s no time to delay AI sa...
more AI Verified source (Oct 8, 2026)

added 11d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Sarmad Ali
Founder of myWakeel and author on AI governance and technology regulation.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The first is a federal governance framework targeting frontier AI developers above $500 million in annual revenue. These developers would be required to publish safety frameworks, report critical incidents, and submit to semi-annual third-party audit...
more AI Verified source (Oct 7, 2026)

added 24d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Pramila Jayapal
U.S. Representative (D-WA)

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The framework’s new legal authorities to hold AI companies accountable would build on those that already apply. They would not preempt or replace federal, state, and local laws, nor would they prevent or impede law enforcement agencies from enforcing...
more AI Verified source (Oct 1, 2026)

added 21d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Andrew Gounardes
New York State Senator

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Frontier AI models pose major risks to our communities and our economy. This is a literal life-or-death issue. The best way to mitigate those risks is to implement smart guardrails that hold the biggest AI developers to strict safety and transparency...
more AI Verified source (Sep 30, 2026)

added 13d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Anthony G. Brown
Attorney General of Maryland.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Attorney General Brown and the coalition are calling on Congress to take immediate action to ensure AI development does not lead to irreversible damage or further unlawful behavior. [...] Any AI regulatory scheme considered by Congress must include: ...
more AI Verified source (Sep 25, 2026)

added 8d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Dan Rayfield
Attorney General of Oregon.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Oregonians are trusting AI with more of their lives, using it at work, at school and at home, and they deserve to know that trust isn’t being abused. Right now, the companies building this technology are largely policing themselves, and we’ve seen th...
more AI Verified source (Sep 25, 2026)

added 12d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Kris Mayes
Arizona attorney general and lawyer.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Strict federal oversight and rules for this fast-developing industry must be implemented as soon as possible to protect humanity from disaster. Congress should also explicitly prohibit any preemption of state laws designed to protect our residents an...
more AI Verified source (Sep 24, 2026)

added 8d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Washington State Office of the Attorney General
Washington state executive office led by Attorney General Nick Brown, serving as the state's chief legal office.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The federal government must also preserve state authority to regulate this technology by prohibiting preemption of state laws.
AI Verified source (Sep 24, 2026)

added 9d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Dana Nessel
54th Attorney General of Michigan.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

AI carries enormous risks that we should not ignore by allowing big tech to regulate itself. Congress needs to exercise its oversight duty and create guardrails for this technology before these powerful systems cause irreparable harm to our global in...
more AI Verified source (Sep 24, 2026)

added 26d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General
California state justice department

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

A federal regulatory framework for frontier AI [...] must include: [...] Explicit preservation of state authority to enact and enforce more protective state laws applicable to AI and providing state officials with full authority to enforce any new fe...
more AI Verified source (Sep 24, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Tina Kotek
Governor of Oregon, serving since 2023.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

While oversight and regulation would be strongest and most effective at the federal level, President Trump continues to dismiss the need for even the most basic guardrails. States, in the meantime, must act with more urgency and do everything possibl...
more AI Verified source (Sep 23, 2026)

added 21d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Americans for Responsible Innovation
AI policy advocacy nonprofit

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

ARI has already worked with state lawmakers on a variety of fronts, including to advocate for greater community stewardship of data centers and to defeat federal preemption efforts.
AI Verified source (Sep 10, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Ann O'Leary
Vice President of Global Affairs at OpenAI.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

In the absence of federal action, California has an opportunity to set a strong standard for youth AI safety.
AI Verified source (Aug 31, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Caleb Knapp
AI policy professional and Director of Government Affairs at The AI Policy Network; formerly Senior Policy Manager at The Alliance for Secure AI.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Congress should not make that mistake. [...] Lawmakers across the aisle are locked in a broader fight over whether states should retain the ability to legislate on AI across certain subject areas, or at all. Supporters of preemption often argue that ...
more AI Verified source (Aug 3, 2026)

added 29d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Iskandar Haykel
Policy analyst and writer on frontier AI governance at Americans for Responsible Innovation.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Outside of areas with a clear national security nexus, namely cybersecurity, CBRNE, and loss of control, states should retain the ability to legislate without federal interference. Unless and until Congress enacts and implements a truly strong federa...
more AI Verified source (Jul 27, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Karen E. Spilka
President of the Massachusetts Senate.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Today the Senate took action to maintain the Commonwealth’s economic edge while giving Massachusetts residents, families, and businesses the best bet at success.
AI Verified source (Jul 23, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Public First Action
Bipartisan U.S. 501(c)(4) advocacy organization focused on AI accountability, transparency, safeguards, and public-interest policy.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Public First Action will also be rolling out advertisements highlighting the strong records of 12 Republican members of Congress who are leading on AI security and accountability. Their records include authorship, sponsorship, and support of the AI O...
more AI Verified source (Jul 17, 2026)

added 26d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Chris Lehane
OpenAI chief global affairs officer

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

State laws will not all be identical, and we look forward to working with policymakers across the country to ensure they strengthen safety while maximizing AI’s economic benefits.
AI Verified source (Jul 15, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Charlie Bullock
Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Law & AI, advising policymakers on AI governance and legal policy.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Federal preemption of state AI laws should proceed on a narrow, issue-by-issue basis. Broad preemption of a vaguely defined and poorly understood category of state laws would, in all likelihood, be a disaster, for both political and policy reasons.
AI Verified source (Jul 8, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Government of Brazil
National government of Brazil, speaking through its delegation at the UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance in July 2026.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Interoperability should not be confused with regulatory uniformity. The compatibility of governance-free approaches should enable dialogue among different national policy frameworks. It should not restrict the right of states to adopt their own regul...
more AI Verified source (Jul 7, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Rachel Ventura
Illinois State Senator representing the 43rd District; co-sponsor of the Illinois Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

With the rise of Artificial Intelligence in all aspects of our lives, coupled with the lack of oversight, we face a looming crisis. This legislation sets a strong precedent to ensure AI developers abide by important safety standards and transparency ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 7, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Caitlin Niedermeyer
Global Affairs representative at OpenAI, working on artificial intelligence policy and governance.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

While we have been very clear that the federal government remains well-positioned to lead on frontier safety because it has the resources, expertise and institutions, we also strongly actually see a position for both Illinois but also California and ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 7, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Emanuel "Chris" Welch
Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The advancements we’ve seen in just the past few years show the tremendous potential that new technology has to transform our economy, remove barriers, and create opportunity—but it also raises critical questions about everything from safety, to our ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Sunny Gandhi
Encode AI political affairs VP

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

SB 315 is the strongest AI safety law in the country. It builds on the frameworks California and New York have already passed and goes one step further by requiring independent audits, so the public doesn’t have to take AI companies at their word. Il...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Nick Beckstead
CEO of the Secure AI Project; advocate for AI safety policy and evaluation standards.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Governor Pritzker and the Illinois legislature are courageously supporting stronger safeguards to oversee powerful AI. Illinois is the first state to mandate independent third-party evaluations of AI safety practices, making its AI law the strongest ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Mary Edly-Allen
Illinois State Senator (D-Libertyville); lead sponsor of SB 315, a frontier AI safety and transparency bill requiring independent third-party audits of major AI developers

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

This bipartisan law is about putting responsible safeguards in place before a preventable catastrophe occurs. Illinois has an opportunity to lead the nation by setting clear expectations for transparency, accountability and public safety. While artif...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Steve Wimmer
Senior Technical and Policy Advisor at Transparency Coalition; advocates accountable AI governance and state leadership.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

SB 315 passed with overwhelming bi-partisan support because lawmakers recognize the same basic truth: the public demands safety and transparency from the AI companies shaping their future. Illinois has created a new template for responsible AI govern...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Daniel Didech
Illinois State Representative (Democrat); lead House sponsor of SB 315, the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The pace of AI development and the capabilities of frontier models are accelerating, and the General Assembly has an obligation to ensure that Illinois residents are protected from catastrophic outcomes. This legislation puts enforceable guardrails i...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate

Loading more opinions...

Abstain (0)

Loading more opinions...

Against (28)

Scott Peters
U.S. Representative from California's 50th congressional district; co-sponsor of the FRONTIER Act.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

The FRONTIER Act is a targeted bill with clear, uniform transparency, and safety standards, instead of a fifty-state patchwork. I'm glad to support this bipartisan effort so that Congress acts before this technology outruns us.
AI Verified source (Jul 23, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
US consumer protection agency

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Some state laws seek to impose their own patchwork of regulations on AI. Colorado’s Artificial Intelligence Act, for instance, appears to coerce companies into altering the output of their AI models to comply with and advance the state’s ideological ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 7, 2026)

added 3mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate

Loading more opinions...

More h/ai-safety votes

Ban open source AI models capable of creating WMDs

Require open source AI models to include safety benchmarks in release notes

Slow down AI development

AGI could make governments subordinate to the companies that develop it

Pausing AI at human-genius level to solve alignment is safer than either racing to superintelligence or halting entirely

Back