Congress
A bipartisan House duo’s final pitch for pre-midterm AI action
A bipartisan House duo is racing against the clock to build consensus around a framework for regulating artificial intelligence — and prove Congress is up to the task of setting guardrails around the rapidly-evolving technology.
Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) formally introduced legislation last Thursday with four cosponsors — two from each party — that would give the government more oversight over cutting-edge AI models as new and potentially dangerous technological advances continue to go largely unchecked.
It’s a considerably reworked version of a discussion draft the two lawmakers unveiled weeks earlier. It was highly anticipated as the most serious cross-party attempt at comprehensive AI regulatory legislation to date — and almost immediately panned by Republicans and Democrats alike.
But Trahan and Obernolte both think they’ve now found the sweet spot and are hopeful the Energy and Commerce Committee schedules a hearing or markup on the measure when the House reconvenes in September after the summer recess.
“That is the goal,” Trahan said in an interview Friday. “I think that there is real urgency. There’s earth-shattering news practically every week, and that’s only going to get more frequent and more serious as these models get more powerful.”
Obernolte said in an interview earlier in the week he “absolutely” thought the bill could move out of committee in the fall. “We’re certainly going to try and get it done this year.”
Yet when asked last week about whether he would bring up that bill — or any comprehensive AI legislation — before the midterms, Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie was noncommittal: “I’m not sure if we’ll get there before the election,” the Kentucky Republican said.
Congress has ultimately done little to legislate on AI under the Republican governing trifecta, as members remain divided on how to tackle the thorny policy area — particularly the question of how involved the federal government should be in regulating private sector innovation. The Obernolte-Trahan bill is the latest test for whether lawmakers can reach consensus on the issue before the November elections.
In the 119th Congress so far, lawmakers have managed to send to the president’s desk one bill that criminalizes the sharing of AI-generated deepfakes and “revenge porn.” The Energy and Commerce Committee has passed bipartisan bills on data centers and kids online safety but none have advanced onto in the Senate.
Across the Capitol, the Senate Commerce Committee was just forced to delay a highly-anticipated markup of AI legislation at least a week as Chair Ted Cruz (R-Texas) struggles to put together an agenda of bills that stand a chance of passing on the chamber floor.
In the House, Obernolte and Trahan are trying to set their proposal up for success despite the odds. In interviews, they both described how they worked hard to respond to the initially negative feedback they received from colleagues on their discussion draft.
They have seriously scaled down provisions in their latest version relating to preemption of state AI laws, seeking to strike a balance for lawmakers who are split between those who want the ability to replace local regulations with a federal framework governing AI, and those who want to leave regulatory action to the states.
“We all heard the criticism … and we narrowed the preemption [provisions] substantially,” Trahan said. “It now only touches three areas the federal bill actually covers: catastrophic risk transparency, independent verification and incident reporting. That’s it.”
“So, child safety laws are explicitly protected,” she continued. “So is the consumer protection, privacy and state procurement. All of that stays with the states.”
Obernolte acknowledged the topic of preemption makes people “emotional” but the new legislative language more precisely describes exactly “what we meant on what we were preempting … and I think that that’s giving everyone more comfort.”
Their bill would propose robust emergency shutdown authorities for AI models determined to be major national security risks, replacing the more haphazard nature of the Trump administration’s response in recent months to concerning technological developments.
It also would require large developers to publish safety reports, report safety incidents and participate in independent safety audits. Those auditors would have to then report any models to the government that pose “imminent catastrophic risk” and the Secretary of Commerce could choose to restrict their deployment.
Last week’s first documented case of an autonomous AI breach helped bolster their case that this kind of legislation is necessary, both lawmakers said, with Trahan pointing out, “we only know about these incidents because OpenAI chose to tell us — there’s no law that requires it.”
Trahan, a member of House Democratic leadership, has been working outside the structure of the three-member AI commission overseen by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries but was optimistic when asked if the proposal might eventually get their backing.
“The feedback has been overwhelmingly positive,” she said, adding she plans to spend recess talking with party leaders and the top Democrats on key committees “whether there’s a path to make this bill even better and to move it before we break for the midterms.”
Obernolte said he’s talking to GOP leaders “constantly” to “make sure that everyone knew what was going on and what we were doing.”
But he also added that he hasn’t yet asked Republican leaders for their endorsement, arguing it would be “inappropriate” for them to give the bill their blessing “at this point.”
In the hours before Obernolte and Trahan released their formal bill text, Majority Leader Steve Scalise said in an interview that while he had not spoken to Obernolte about what the two lawmakers intended to introduce, Republican leaders were interested in advancing a regulatory framework that they deemed not overly burdensome.
“We’re trying to get AI preemption … but we also want to make sure that we don’t impede innovation with heavy regulation from the government,” said Scalise.
A Scalise spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment about what the Louisiana Republican thought of the latest proposal.
House Speaker Mike Johnson has also not taken a position on the bill. His last comments about the Obernolte-Trahan effort were in June, when he said he was planning to discuss the then-forthcoming regulatory framework with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman during the tech giant’s visit to Blue Light News.
Obernolte is confident his bill with Trahan represents the emerging consensus view about where lawmakers need to go next on AI policy, even within the Republican Party that has long championed limited government regulation.
“I think that everyone would agree we need food safety inspectors, right? So sometimes the two parties disagree on just how onerous to make those regulations. … I don’t think anyone’s saying that we shouldn’t have any regulation of AI,” he said.
He also suggested perspectives may be shifting.
“I think everyone’s thoughts on this topic have evolved as the technology itself has evolved, and because AI is such a fast-moving technology, I think that Congress is going to have to stay very engaged on this,” Obernolte said. “So, even if we succeed in passing [the bill] this year and getting it signed into law, immediately in the next Congress, we’re going to have to dive into the things that have changed.”
In a sign Obernolte may still have people to convince inside his party, though, Scalise last week rejected the idea that Republican views on the subject have evolved.
“No,” Scalise said. “I mean — our Republicans, by and large, are against heavy regulation that impedes innovation in any industry.”
The House is back in session Monday for the first time in five weeks. It’s not clear how long members will stick around.
Speaker Mike Johnson is hoping to tick the lone essential item off the chamber’s to-do list in lawmakers’ first days back: sending a shutdown-averting spending bill to President Donald Trump’s desk. Otherwise, the Capitol Hill agenda is devoid of must-pass legislation until later in the year.
Meanwhile, the thin GOP majority has had trouble opening the House floor for debate on any number of legislative priorities, and many Republicans lawmakers are simply eager to get back home ahead of the November midterms rather than endure more headaches in Washington.
Together that has fueled open speculation among members and aides that House leaders will call it quits until mid-November much sooner than the currently scheduled Oct. 1 exit date.
“So many people are having to run back and forth to campaign,” Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) told reporters Thursday. “I think we can get some other things done [beyond the spending stopgap], but the big bills will probably have to wait until after the election.”
Another House Republican, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, was more blunt: “I think we have very little to do.” A third member, running for reelection in a competitive district, said in a text message, “I’d be happy to be sent home early!”
The agitation for an early exit is likely to grow louder if Johnson can win approval as planned this week for the Senate-passed government funding bill, which would postpone a possible shutdown from midnight Sept. 30 to Dec. 11. The funding patch also would extend the deadline to reauthorize lapsing surface transportation authorities.
GOP leaders plan to put the bill on the floor Tuesday under a fast-track method requiring a two-thirds majority vote, and there are reasons to believe it will pass without much drama. Trump and key congressional Democrats have endorsed the 10-week punt.
That bipartisan support is expected to overcome Republicans concerns over a Senate-inserted provision backed by the White House to delay the start of an intoxicating hemp product ban, as well as a provision favored by Democrats to temporarily hold up a Trump administration proposal to put political appointees in charge of federal grant approvals.
“I would say that we’re going to avoid any kind of shutdown, and we’ll be in good shape going into the elections,” Rep. Riley Moore of West Virginia, a GOP appropriator, told reporters earlier this month.
Lawmakers have already punted other major deadlines, leaving members eyeing the post-election “lame duck” session for substantive legislating. But there are also lingering questions about whether House Republican leaders can move forward with a partisan agenda in any case.
Rebel factions upset over matters ranging from ethanol fuel regulations to immigration policy votes have frustrated Johnson’s attempts all summer to pass procedural measures necessary to bring GOP bills to the floor. Many Republicans believe those dynamics will continue into September, leaving the fast-tracked bills passed under “suspension of the rules” as leaders’ only legislative option.
“I don’t think many things are going to pass except for suspension bills,” said another House Republican granted anonymity to speak candidly about the GOP’s expectations for the pre-election session.
While leaders and their top aides acknowledge no current plans to send members home early, a frozen floor could quickly lead them to determine otherwise. At the same time, some Republicans are wary of beating an early retreat after many of them hammered the Senate for leaving town earlier this month without taking up key House-passed bills.
“We need to campaign, but it’s not a great look for us to not come into town and work,” a fifth House Republican granted anonymity said. The member, representing a safe red district, acknowledged that others in more competitive districts likely feel differently.
“People already think we are on vacation when we’re home,” the lawmaker added. “What kind of damage does it do if we leave D.C. again?”
Both chambers will be out of session next week following the Labor Day holiday, and many Republican lawmakers are expected to travel to Dallas at the end of that week for the GOP’s midterm convention. Republicans are looking to amp up one of their top campaign messages beforehand — that Democrats are left-wing extremists — by forcing a vote this week on a resolution condemning socialism “in all its forms.”
The House could also vote this week to censure Rep. Chuck Edwards (R-N.C.) for inappropriate conduct toward two female staffers following an Ethics Committee recommendation. Edwards, who dropped his bid for reelection two days after the panel issued a lengthy report, attempted to clear his name to his colleagues last week ahead of the expected vote.
House GOP leaders could also put a Senate-passed Russian sanctions bill on the floor before the end of the month, though it is unclear whether it can pass. Many House Democrats — including Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the party’s leader on the Foreign Affairs Committee — believe the bill would give too much authority to Trump.
But with many other House priorities currently in Senate limbo, there could be little incentive for members to hang around to wait to see if the Senate will act once it returns Sept. 14 for a brief three-week session.
House Republicans rushed before their summer recess to adopt a budget blueprint for a fresh party-line spending package, but it’s currently stuck across the Capitol amid competing demands from defense hawks, fiscal conservatives and some GOP senators who aren’t convinced another such bill is needed at all.
Senate Republicans don’t expect the budget measure to be brought to the floor before the election, according to five people granted anonymity to disclose private discussions.
House Republicans appear to be acknowledging that reality. When asked if he was confident the Senate would take up a third reconciliation bill, Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) told reporters this month that “‘confident’ is probably the wrong word.”
Instead, the Senate is expected to focus in September on confirming Trump’s nominees and holding a vote on cryptocurrency legislation, as well as trying to advance a bill to overhaul college athletics and the Senate version of the farm bill.
Some House Republicans, including Majority Whip Tom Emmer, have been trying to build public pressure on the Senate to pass the crypto bill known as the Clarity Act for months. But a mid-September vote on that measure is likely to fail. And while negotiations continue over the Senate’s college sports bill, a bill on the same topic in the House has stalled out, giving lawmakers little reason to stay to see if a Senate deal comes together.
As for the farm bill, the House passed its version earlier this year largely along party lines, while the Senate version failed to advance in committee earlier this month due to GOP absences and Democratic opposition. Senate Agriculture Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.)said he plans to try again in September.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune is eager to advance the farm bill before the election, but doing so will require Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to return from a monthslong absence — or Democrats to agree to a deal.
While Republicans are hopeful that McConnell could come back in September, any final agreement on the major agriculture package is expected to wait until after Election Day.
“I think our Democrat colleagues are probably saying we want to wait until after the election to find out what the House of Representatives is going to look like, the Senate is going to look like,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said at an agricultural conference in South Dakota earlier this month.
Riley Rogerson contributed to this report.
Congress
The midterms are months away. Members are already jockeying for seats on this powerful panel.
Lawmakers can spend years trying to land seats on the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee. Several could finally get their chance in the next Congress.
The panel with vast jurisdiction over health care, artificial intelligence, energy and telecommunications will have at least eight empty slots in the next Congress — four on each side of the aisle — thanks to a combination of planned retirements, attempts to climb to higher office and primary election defeats.
Democrats are losing Reps. Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, Marc Veasey of Texas, Robin Kelly of Illinois and Diana DeGette of Colorado. Republican departures include Reps. Buddy Carter of Georgia, Neal Dunn of Florida, Dan Crenshaw of Texas and John James of Michigan. Some of these members also lead influential subcommittees, opening coveted spots that will need to be filled next year.
The intense interest in Energy and Commerce is leading to a high level of public campaigning, particularly among Democrats who believe they stand a chance of winning the majority in the midterms and are eager to influence major policy debates.
“Since I first arrived at Congress in 2021, Energy and Commerce has always been my number one committee that I’ve sought to serve on,” Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, a progressive Democrat who is making a particularly concerted push, said in an interview.
The Democratic Steering and Policy Committee, made up of leadership and lawmakers from regions across the country, will make selections based on a variety of factors including years of tenure and geographical representation. But the current intraparty jockeying could also set the stage for a proxy battle pitting progressives against moderates, mirroring the ideological clash Democrats are watching play out on the campaign trail.
Democrats famously tied themselves in knots over this dynamic in 2020, when members of the Steering and Policy Committee were torn between progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and then-Rep. Kathleen Rice, a fellow New York Democrat and a centrist.
The panel ultimately gave the open seat to Rice, who in the closed-door meeting was perceived as likely to be more cooperative in advancing the party’s key legislative priorities. She ended up being among a trio of moderates who thwarted then-Chair Frank Pallone’s health care agenda by opposing a drug pricing provision, punting the issue to another committee of jurisdiction.
Four years later, Ocasio-Cortez finally made it onto the committee.
“The argument that some individuals in the caucus had made against my appointment in a previous term was this idea about being a team player,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a recent interview. “But ironically … not only did they deny me the seat on those grounds, but they appointed someone who actually voted with Republicans.”
“So when we talk about who’s going to be a team player,” she continued, “I think that especially if we are working with thin margins, it’s very important that on an issue as important as health care, energy, et cetera, and confronting a Trump White House … we need to have very strong Democrats on the committee that are going to fight forcefully for the caucus’s priorities.”
Pallone, a New Jersey Democrat who is in line to continue leading Energy and Commerce Democrats, has hinted he plans to pursue progressive policies — such as a crackdown on data centers that could involve a nationwide moratorium — should his party prevail in November. He’ll need buy-in on such plans from the left wing of his caucus, but he was not eager in July to discuss the committee assignment process.
“Let’s get elected in the majority first,” Pallone said in an interview. “I’m not going to deal with that until later.”
For now, Democrats now vying to be on Energy and Commerce are leaning less into their ideological leanings and more the policy expertise they would bring to the table — and the value their appointments would bring to constituents.
Stansbury, for example, called the committee a critical platform for tackling climate and energy policy, adding it was “very important to my district to address the rural health care crisis and the behavioral health crisis.”
Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.), a first-term lawmaker, is also making her case to get onto the committee, pointing to her experience as a critical care physician and pulmonologist.
“I’ve seen firsthand the enormous burdens patients, families, and healthcare providers face every day,” she said in a statement. “It’s part of the reason I ran for office — because so many of the problems I encountered couldn’t be solved in the exam room.”
Historically, members interested in joining Energy and Commerce tend to bide their time on the House Natural Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over public lands, energy development, fisheries and Native American issues. Ocasio-Cortez made the leap, and Stansbury and Dexter are hoping to follow.
Rep. Jill Tokuda of Hawaii, who serves on the Agriculture and Armed Services committees, is also looking to be seated on Energy and Commerce. An aide said in a statement that she would be “first congressional delegation member from Hawaiʻi to join the committee” as well as only the second Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander.
An aide for Rep. Eric Sorensen of Illinois, who currently sits with Tokuda on Agriculture and Armed Services, said he is interested in joining Energy and Commerce next year, too. So is Rep. Luz Rivas of California, an engineer who appeared at the committee’s “Member Day” forum to speak about her STEM background and interest working on AI issues.
Republicans looking to get on the panel will be picked after the elections by the GOP Steering Committee, and Rep. Bob Onder of Missouri is making an especially forceful push. He said in an interview last week his more than 30 years as a physician would be an asset for the committee, which has traditionally had a handful of lawmakers with medical backgrounds and is set to lose two: Carter, a pharmacist, and Dunn, a urologist.
He also said he has made his interest known to Guthrie and that Reps. Greg Murphy of North Carolina and John Joyce of Pennsylvania — co-chairs of the GOP Doctor’s Caucus — wrote a letter last week to Speaker Mike Johnson on his behalf, saying that Onder’s “clinical experience, policy engagement, and demonstrated leadership make him exceptionally well qualified.”
Rep. Brad Knott (R-N.C.) is also making his interest known, saying he has “talked to a lot of folks” and is pursuing a “kind of whole committee wide approach” to convincing Steering members to put him on Energy and Commerce.
“North Carolina is one of the fastest-growing states,” Knott said in an interview. “Energy demand will at least double in the next 10 years. Got to get that policy right.”
Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) said in an interview in July “there’s a couple buzzing around” who want to join the panel but declined to elaborate.
“We have a lot of talented members, but I’ll let them say what they are interested in,” he said.
A top pollster for President Donald Trump is pushing back on recent public polling showing Republican Mike Rogers trailing progressive Abdul El-Sayed in the marquee Michigan Senate race.
Tony Fabrizio, who is conducting polling for Rogers, says the polls released this month are over-sampling Democratic-leaning voters, specifically college-educated and Black voters, according to an internal memo obtained by Blue Light News. A Susquehanna poll released this month showed El-Sayed leading by seven points and a TIPP poll showed him leading by four points.
El-Sayed’s lead in those polls is a “fake narrative,” Fabrizio wrote. His polling for AARP — conducted alongside Democratic firm Impact Research — showed the race essentially tied.
The warning follows huge polling misses in the Democratic primaries in the Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida, which he wrote were “some of the most egregious examples of public polling failures in recent memory.” It’s also a sign that Republicans are wary of the string of bad polling numbers for Rogers in the race, which is crucial for determining control of the chamber.
Jim Lee, CEO of Susquehanna Polling and Research, told Blue Light News that the firm did not oversample any demographics. “I think their head is in the sand,” Lee said, noting in part what he said was a gap in enthusiasm between Democratic and Republican voters this cycle.
TIPP didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Fabrizio, in the memo, argued on the Susquehanna poll: “50% of the sample in this survey is college-educated – making them massively overrepresented to what they should be. We took a look at 2022 and 2024 Exit Polls and VoteCast data and, as shown below, there is no indication that the Michigan electorate will be anywhere near 50% college-educated. In fact, it is unlikely they will be even 40% college-educated.”
He also noted “a huge gap” between college-educated and non-college educated voters.
“This was the driving issue of the public polling misses for President Trump in 2016 and 2024, especially in the Upper Midwest states of Michigan and Wisconsin,” Fabrizio added. “By increasing college-educated voters by 10+ points, and thus decreasing non-college educated voters by the same, we can pretty much guarantee this poll is significantly overestimating El-Sayed’s vote share.”
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Dictatorship12 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words