Helen Toner Warns Congress May Mishandle AI Policy Amid Challenges

Helen Toner, a former OpenAI board member and current director of strategy at Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, has expressed concern over Congress's ability to effectively manage AI policymaking. Speaking at TechCrunch’s StrictlyVC event in Washington, D.C., Toner highlighted the potential for Congress to respond to AI issues in a “knee-jerk” manner if significant changes are not made.

AI's Growing Impact and Legislative Inaction

Toner pointed out that AI is poised to become a powerful technology, and any legislative response driven by crisis rather than foresight could be counterproductive. She emphasized the need for proactive and thoughtful policymaking to avoid detrimental outcomes.

Current Legislative Landscape

In 2023, President Joe Biden signed an executive order implementing consumer protections related to AI and mandated safety test results sharing by AI developers with government agencies. Additionally, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) published a roadmap for identifying and mitigating AI risks. However, despite these efforts, Congress has not yet passed comprehensive AI legislation, unlike the European Union, which recently enacted the AI Act.

State-Level Legislative Efforts

The absence of federal AI regulations has led to a surge in state and local government actions. According to TechNet, state legislators introduced over 440% more AI-related bills in 2023 compared to 2022. Close to 400 new state-level AI laws have been proposed in recent months.

Notable State Actions

California: Advanced roughly 30 new bills on AI aimed at consumer and job protection.

Colorado: Approved a measure requiring AI companies to exercise “reasonable care” to prevent discrimination.

Tennessee: Passed the ELVIS Act, prohibiting AI cloning of musicians’ voices or likenesses without consent.

The Need for Federal Mandates

The varied definitions and regulations across states create uncertainty for both industry and consumers. For instance, state laws differ on what constitutes “automated decision making,” with some laws excluding decisions made with any human involvement.

Toner’s Call for Federal Oversight

Toner advocates for a high-level federal mandate to provide a cohesive framework for AI regulation. She suggests that even basic, common-sense guardrails implemented now could mitigate future crises and reduce the need for hasty, ill-considered responses later.

Conclusion

As AI continues to advance, the need for comprehensive and thoughtful legislation becomes increasingly urgent. Helen Toner’s insights underscore the importance of proactive federal policymaking to ensure that AI's benefits are maximized while its risks are effectively managed.