Who really wants this??? The people who get rich from your information....

A bipartisan AI deal gets a brutal reality check

Republicans remain skeptical of a sweeping deal to regulate advanced AI, even as Democrats come under pressure to scuttle anything that blocks state rules on the technology.

By Brendan Bordelon, Meredith Lee Hill and Kelsey Brugger

Washington’s most ambitious attempt at a grand compromise on artificial intelligence oversight is most likely doomed for this year.

Rising opposition from key Democrats, skepticism from Republican leadership and persistent aloofness from the White House are among the existential threats facing the 269-page draft bill that Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) unveiled Thursday. It also must overcome a shrinking legislative calendar — threatening to push any serious congressional action on AI to 2027 at the earliest.

The draft represents a high-water mark in Congress’ early efforts to regulate AI, with provisions that would impose nationwide safety and transparency rules on top tech firms. It also includes research, education and workforce development provisions that have gotten backing from Democratic and Republican lawmakers in both chambers. And its authors are now aiming to enlist support from their colleagues, including both Speaker Mike Johnson and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

But those efforts so far seem destined to fall flat — with many critics training fire on its proposed three-year ban on state laws that regulate AI’s development. Those blasting the draft include the three House Democrats whom Jeffries has empowered to chart the party’s course on the technology.

“While we appreciate the bipartisan effort from Representatives Jay Obernolte and Lori Trahan, their proposed discussion draft on AI does not meet the enormity of the moment,” wrote Reps. Josh Gottheimer (N.J.), Valerie Foushee (N.C.) and Ted Lieu (Calif.), co-chairs of the House Democratic Commission on AI. They said the document “cannot serve as the basis for productive dialogue.”

Top Republicans are also skeptical of an AI deal with Democrats — starting with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, who has long been suspicious of Obernolte’s push for a compromise. In an interview with POLITICO, he said he had not seen the full framework released on Thursday but had heard its protections for “innovation” were “narrow.”

“You also don’t want to have some big regulatory structure at the federal level trying to control algorithms of private companies,” said Scalise. The Republican leader added that he supports a broader preemption of state AI laws than what Obernolte and Trahan now envision.

Trahan spokesperson Francis Grubar and Obernolte spokesperson Connor Chapinski both stressed that Thursday’s proposal is merely a discussion draft, and that their offices are open to feedback.

Democratic opposition is largely driven by language preempting state AI regulations, a provision that Republican leaders have repeatedly sought to jam through Congress. AI safety advocates pushed back on Thursday against preemption in the Obernolte-Trahan proposal, contending that its ban on new state rules for AI developers would allow tech companies to challenge other laws meant to protect children and content creators from the negative impacts of AI.

“It says all state laws that regulate ‘development,’ and development is defined pretty broadly in the bill,” said Charlie Bullock, a lawyer and senior research fellow at the Institute for Law and AI think tank.

Adam Kovacevich, founder and CEO of the tech industry group Chamber of Progress, said Democrats are also hesitant to compromise with Republicans on AI before November, when they hope to flip the House and Senate and exert more influence over tech policy.

“Democrats are optimistic enough about taking the House that they’re not going to be striking any bipartisan deal between now and the election,” said Kovacevich.

On the GOP side, Republican leaders have spent months turning up their noses at Obernolte’s compromise approach on AI. That includes President Donald Trump and others in his administration, who have pointedly declined to endorse Obernolte’s bipartisan approach.

In a Thursday interview with POLITICO, Obernolte said he has been “back-channeling with the White House to make sure that we’re all pushing in the same direction” on AI. But he still doesn’t know if the Trump administration supports his compromise with Trahan — “we haven’t asked them that specific question,” Obernolte said.

Johnson was also non-committal, at best, when asked Thursday about the bipartisan AI agreement. While stressing the importance of preempting state AI laws, the speaker said he had not reviewed Obernolte and Trahan’s draft proposal and would not commit to putting an AI compromise on the House floor ahead of the election.

“We’re going to do it as soon as we are able to build consensus around a package,” said Johnson.

The tech lobby was perhaps the only group in Washington with nice things to say about Obernolte and Trahan’s framework.

“Obernolte and Trahan, for the moment, also appear to have found a way to thread the needle on preemption in a way that doesn’t overstep and instead focuses on the most powerful, consequential AI models, which makes sense as a federal responsibility,” said Tony Samp, an AI lobbyist at DLA Piper.

“Whether or not this legislation advances is another question,” Samp added. “But it’s encouraging to see members from both parties see eye to eye on sensible AI policy for a change.”

Top AI companies were notably silent on the framework, however, including OpenAI, Anthropic, Google and Microsoft, whose spokespeople all either declined to comment or did not respond to requests on Thursday.

And across Washington, tech lobbyists seem to have accepted there’s little chance of the proposal becoming law this year.

“I think it’s been made pretty apparent that House leadership isn’t going to just get on board with whatever Jay Obernolte decides should be the federal framework for AI,” one top tech lobbyist, granted anonymity to discuss sensitive talks, said in the days leading up to Thursday’s release.