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

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

Share this with your representatives, journalists and friends

Key insights

Both supporters and opponents repeatedly call for federal guardrails; they diverge mainly on whether federal action should be a minimum baseline or a uniform ceiling.
Supporters often argue from present conditions, saying states must act because federal protections are absent, delayed, or too weak, while opponents emphasize the longer-term costs of multiple overlapping regimes.
Several supportive quotes still place frontier safety or risks with a clear national-security nexus primarily at the federal level, suggesting much of the disagreement is about the scope of preemption rather than whether Washington has any role.
Opponents tend to frame the issue in terms of interstate consistency, startup burdens, and national competitiveness, whereas supporters focus on children, workers, consumers, public safety, and accountability.
Support for state authority comes from governors, attorneys general, legislators, labor and civil-liberties groups, and some AI companies and policy advocates.

Arguments for

State backstop amid federal inaction

Proponents say states cannot wait for Washington when federal oversight is absent, weak, or still being debated. In their view, preempting state laws before strong federal guardrails exist would leave residents exposed to harms from increasingly powerful AI systems.

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
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
In today's lawless, Wild West artificial intelligence environment, states have been leading the charge to implement safeguards addressing serious risks ranging from algorithmic bias to data privacy and consumer protection. But the Trump White House aims to kill state AI laws with…

Don Beyer · 2026 · full quote

Federal floor, not ceiling

Many supporters accept a national framework, but only if it establishes minimum protections and expressly preserves stronger state laws and state enforcement. They argue federal rules should be a floor that states can build on as new risks emerge, not a ceiling that freezes protection.

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
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
Any federal AI law should serve as a floor, not a ceiling, preserving flexibility for states to go further where necessary to protect their residents.

Rob Bonta · 2025 · full quote
We write today to echo their concerns and respectfully urge you to oppose any legislative framework that establishes a federal preemption ceiling on artificial intelligence guardrails. While we support a bipartisan federal effort to establish a baseline of consumer protections, w…

Danny Weiss · May 22, 2026 · full quote
Congress should instead focus on setting a strong federal floor of protections, while preserving state authority to go further, as needed, in addressing new harms in ways that are tailored to their constituents' needs.

Kansas House of Representatives · 2026 · full quote

State experimentation and learning

Supporters describe states as places to test audits, transparency rules, aligned frameworks, and other governance models in a fast-moving field. They argue this experimentation can create templates and lessons for Congress and even shape a de facto national direction.

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
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
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 a federal regulatory ceiling i…

Caleb Knapp · Aug 3, 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
First, the tug of war between states and the federal government will continue. While states made significant strides in 2025 to address AI, federal policymakers were instead focused on preempting those efforts. Despite failing to do so twice, proponents of preemption will undoubt…

Cody Venzke · Jan 6, 2026 · full quote
As these models grow more powerful, this kind of enforceable accountability matters more than ever. Illinois lawmakers have set a new standard, and we hope other states and the federal government build on their dedication to AI safety.

Cesar Fernandez · May 27, 2026 · full quote

Tailored protections for residents

Advocates say states need flexibility to address harms that fall directly on their residents, including risks to children, workers, consumers, elections, speech, public safety, and local infrastructure. They present state authority as necessary to tailor protections to local industries, public-sector use, and newly emerging problems.

As state lawmakers, we take seriously our responsibility to safeguard our constituents from AI harms to children, workers, artists and creators, families, and consumers. GAAIA’s broad preemption provisions would freeze a sweeping set of state laws and tie the hands of lawmakers a…

State Lawmakers Letter: GAAIA State AI Law Preemption · Jun 16, 2026 · full quote
States must be able to protect their own residents from harm, hold tech companies accountable, and ensure that AI is safe and trustworthy.

Jina John · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
There have been efforts, however, to prevent states from enacting new protections and to nullify existing state safeguards—leaving workers vulnerable when employers deploy discriminatory and exploitative AI systems in the workplace. Any federal legislation should be a floor, not …

Tanya L. Goldman · Feb 3, 2026 · full quote
The Constitution reserves a lot of power to the states in particular areas [like] public safety, which can pertain to issues that AI touches like deepfakes, election interference, and regulating how technology shows up in mental health care.

Deborah Ross · 2026 · full quote
Stripping states of jurisdiction to regulate AI is a subsidy to Big Tech and will prevent states from protecting against online censorship of political speech, predatory applications that target children, violations of intellectual property rights and data center intrusions on po…

Ron DeSantis · 2025 · 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

Independent audits and transparency

Supporters argue stricter state standards can require independent audits, third-party evaluations, transparency, and enforceable guardrails rather than relying on company assurances. They say stronger verification and accountability are needed to build public trust in AI deployment.

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 in the country.

Nick Beckstead · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote
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. Illinois has set the new standar…

Sunny Gandhi · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote
The sweeping preemption clause in this bill goes far beyond replacing state laws that might conflict or duplicate this federal framework. It locks states out of even simple, light-touch transparency and evaluation regulations for other kinds of harms or risks. We cannot advance A…

Nicholas Garcia · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
Good AI policy requires independent verification of safety. AB 1405 will take a significant step in creating the ecosystem for independent verification to become a reality. By working in concert with Sen. McNerney we are building a framework where California leads the way in crea…

Rebecca Bauer-Kahan · Jun 17, 2026 · full quote
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 artificial intelligence holds extra…

Mary Edly-Allen · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote
This represents an important consumer safety check on a growing industry that has intimate access to our personal information. I’m proud of the work the sponsors have done to set a standard for safety, responsibility and transparency that I hope serves as a national model.

Don Harmon · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote

Arguments against

Uniform national rulebook

Opponents argue that AI operates across state lines, so conflicting state and local requirements would create a confusing compliance landscape for companies operating nationally. They favor one federal rulebook that streamlines obligations and preempts conflicting frameworks.

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
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
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
Congress should strongly consider enacting a national standard that streamlines compliance and expressly preempts conflicting state and local frameworks.

Bradford J. Kelley · Feb 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

Competitiveness and innovation

This side says a fifty-state patchwork could slow deployment, burden startups, and weaken American leadership in the global AI competition. A single national standard is presented as the better way to support innovation, jobs, and long-term competitiveness while still setting rules of the road.

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
“There’s no doubt that AI is rapidly transforming how we live and work. The question now is whether America develops the rules of the road and leads the future of this extremely powerful tool, or if we let adversaries like China set the terms,” Fedorchak said. “It cannot be the l…

Julie Fedorchak · Mar 20, 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
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

Subjective or ideological mandates

Some critics contend that state AI laws can rely on subjective judgments or poorly defined obligations before clear national standards exist. They warn that state measures may pressure companies to change model outputs to match a state's ideological objectives or impose extra burdens without clear safety gains.

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
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.

Andrew N. Ferguson · Jul 1, 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

Middle ground

Federal lead, state flexibility

Some contributors want federal leadership on frontier safety or other areas with a clear national-security nexus, while leaving states room to regulate deployment, public-sector use, and local harms. Others would accept preemption only narrowly or when a stronger federal substitute clearly replaces what states have already built.

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
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, meanwhile, would retain full power to govern how AI is deployed and used, from hiring and housing to health care, education, chatbots, and more.

Lori Trahan · Jun 12, 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
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

The debate is less about whether AI needs oversight than about how authority should be divided while the technology changes quickly. One camp sees state power as a necessary backstop and source of stronger, adaptable protections, while the other sees uniform federal rules as necessary to avoid fragmentation and protect innovation. Hybrid proposals show some shared ground, but the breadth of state authority remains the central point of disagreement.

Cast your vote:

Results (131 votes):

Total (131 votes)

For 102 (78%) Abstain 0 (0%) Against 29 (22%)

For (102)

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 4d 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 1d 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 6d 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 12d 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 23h 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 29d 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 9d 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 6d 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 2mo 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 2mo 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 2mo 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 2mo 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 2mo 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 2mo 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
Don Harmon
President of the Illinois Senate; backs state AI safety, responsibility, and transparency standards.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

This represents an important consumer safety check on a growing industry that has intimate access to our personal information. I’m proud of the work the sponsors have done to set a standard for safety, responsibility and transparency that I hope serv...
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
Kwame Raoul
Attorney General of Illinois; supports state AI guardrails and transparency in the absence of federal oversight.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Frontier model AI systems have the potential to be used for many good things. However, due to their massive computing power, they also could cause catastrophic events, such as cyberattacks or the system evading control by developers or users. In the ...
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
Juliana Stratton
Lieutenant Governor of Illinois; advocates responsible AI safeguards and public accountability.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Artificial intelligence is creating incredible opportunities, but it also brings new risks, especially for young people. Illinois is showing that innovation and accountability can go hand in hand by setting clear expectations that help protect our co...
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
JB Pritzker
Governor of Illinois; signed the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act in 2026.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

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 fr...
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
National Conference of State Legislatures
Bipartisan organization representing U.S. state legislatures and legislative staff in state-federal policy advocacy.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

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 protecti...
more AI Verified source (Jul 2026)

added 13d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Robert Fulk
Indiana Secretary of State official discussing AI governance and state regulatory authority.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

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...
more AI Verified source (Jul 2026)

added 2mo 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 2mo 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

If leading AI labs adopted a windfall clause (pre-committing to broadly share profits above a high threshold), it would meaningfully reduce competitive pressure to cut safety corners

Mandate 72-hour reporting of critical AI safety incidents to a national authority

AI poses an existential threat to humanity

AI alignment is solvable

AGI could make governments subordinate to the companies that develop it

Back