(The Center Square) – California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order to ensure the responsible development and use of artificial intelligence technology.
But the Democratic governor’s order, which was issued on Monday, is now getting some push back from a Republican legislator and a think tank.
The order directs agencies to ensure that any companies that the state contracts with explain safeguards to prevent the misuse of AI technology.
That misuse includes AI distribution of material that depicts sexual abuse of children, models that allow the utilization of harmful bias and violations of free speech or civil rights, according to the executive order.
“The Governor’s executive order does not create new regulations or change any laws that would generate significant new costs to the state,” said Tara Gallegos, chief deputy director of communications in the Governor’s Office.
“It’s regarding procurement of AI tools and ensuring that the companies the state contracts with are properly protecting their users,” Gallegos told The Center Square Wednesday, answering questions by email.
Newsom’s actions on artificial intelligence follow President Donald Trump’s own executive order in December that pushed state legislatures across the country to pass legislation that was friendly to companies that develop AI technology. Trump’s effort to push through industry-friendly regulations with his order came at the end of a year in which Congress didn’t pass any AI regulations.
Those in the realm of artificial intelligence, however, don’t believe that more restrictive national or state regulations are the answer to problems posed by new technology.
“I do think the framing of it being rolled back at the federal level is interesting,” Mark Dalton, senior policy director of technology and innovation at R Street, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, told The Center Square on Wednesday. “I think it’s more a recognition that the harms in artificial intelligence occur in areas where there are already protections in place. So I don’t necessarily see a problem with a rollback at the federal level, and I wouldn’t even characterize it that way.”
Some regulations could be helpful, Dalton said.
“I would recommend some very targeted language around specific high-risk government use cases,” Dalton told The Center Square. “We at R Street would be happy to see statutory remedies for specific, documented harms with clear definitions rather than the broad language that’s used, and we’d love to see it go through a legislative process.”
California lawmakers, fearing that an executive order only reflects the opinion of one and not the consideration of many, would also like to see legislation combat the harms that AI technology can sometimes perpetuate, one legislator told The Center Square on Wednesday.
“The Legislature is a much better place to deal with that than an executive order,” Sen. Roger Niello, R-Fair Oaks and author of AI legislation himself, told The Center Square. “The legislative process is a collaboration of 120 of us, obviously dominated by the majority party, but nonetheless, we get our say in that in the minority party. The Legislature gets no say in an executive order.”
Multiple Democrats and Republicans in the California Legislature who have authored AI legislation did not respond to The Center Square’s request for comment on Wednesday. Spokespersons for legislators from both sides of the aisle told The Center Square lawmakers were not available to comment.
