California’s New AI Safety Law: A Balance of Oversight and Innovation
California has recently enacted a landmark artificial intelligence (AI) regulation known as Senate Bill 53 (SB 53), signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom. This legislation establishes the first comprehensive legal framework in the United States requiring large AI companies, specifically those generating over $500 million in annual revenue, to publicly disclose their safety and security protocols.
Government Regulation and Technological Advancement
Adam Billen, the vice president of public policy at the youth-led advocacy group Encode AI, highlighted in a TechCrunch podcast how SB 53 exemplifies a collaborative effort between government regulation and technological innovation. The law mandates that these companies articulate measures to prevent their systems from potential misuse, including catastrophic outcomes such as cyberattacks or the development of biological and chemical weapons.
Regulation and Innovation Don’t Have to Clash
Billen emphasized the necessity for policymakers to act, asserting that legislation can be crafted to protect innovation while ensuring product safety. He pointed out that many requirements in the bill are already standard practices among leading AI firms, such as model testing and transparency reports. However, he noted that competitive pressures have occasionally led some companies to relax their safety protocols, which this new law aims to rectify.
“Companies are already doing the stuff we ask them to do in this bill,” Billen stated. “Are they starting to skimp in some areas? Yes. And that’s why bills like this are important.”
Concerns Over State-Level Regulation
Before the bill’s passage, OpenAI publicly opposed the proposed law, arguing that AI regulation should fall under federal jurisdiction rather than being governed by individual states. The venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz echoed this sentiment, warning that state-level AI regulations could infringe upon the dormant Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, which restricts states from interfering with interstate commerce.
Billen, however, dismissed these concerns, asserting that claims regarding state laws threatening innovation or competitiveness are exaggerated. “Are bills like SB 53 the thing that will stop us from beating China? No. It’s intellectually dishonest to say that’s what will hold America back,” he asserted.
The Federal vs. State AI Regulation Power Struggle
Encode AI has previously led a coalition of over 200 groups opposing federal preemption proposals that would prevent states from enacting their own AI regulations. Billen pointed out that Senator Ted Cruz has been an advocate for undermining state autonomy in AI oversight, introducing the SANDBOX Act, which would permit AI companies to apply for waivers to bypass certain federal regulations temporarily.
Billen anticipates a forthcoming federal AI framework proposal that may appear balanced but could ultimately override state-level laws, warning that such legislation might eliminate federalism in digital America and expose the government to negligence in holding companies accountable.
Addressing Competition with China
While acknowledging the reality of US-China competition in AI, Billen insists it should not hinder state-level regulatory efforts. He argues that lawmakers should prioritize federal export controls and ensure American AI firms have access to essential computing chips to remain competitive globally.
“If the thing you care about is beating China in the race on AI, and I do care about that, then the things you would push for are export controls and ensuring American companies have the chips,” he stated. “But that’s not what the industry is pushing for.”
A Testament to Democracy in Action
Billen describes SB 53 as a functioning example of democracy, illustrating the collaboration between government and industry to produce a law acceptable to both sides, albeit imperfectly. “It’s very ugly and messy. But that process of democracy and federalism is the entire foundation of our country and our economic system. I think SB 53 is one of the best proof points that that can still work,” he concluded.
