Congress

NY-12’s ‘AI guy’ hasn’t always voted in favor of tech guardrail legislation

Published

4 weeks ago

June 1, 2026

NEW YORK — Whether the hopefuls looking to replace retiring Rep. Jerry Nadler like it or not, their race has become a flashpoint for the national debate over how to regulate artificial intelligence — and Assemblymember Alex Bores has claimed the label of “AI guy.”

Much of Bores’ rise in the competitive campaign has stemmed from his signature policy in the state Legislature, the RAISE Act, one of the country’s landmark laws to establish guardrails for AI. It drew millions of dollars in attack ads against him from tech leaders who argue such regulations stymie innovation — and even more from those in the industry who are friendlier to AI oversight and are now boosting Bores.

Some of Bores’ opponents have sought to turn the tables on his AI message. In a recent interview, Kennedy scion Jack Schlossberg, one of Bores’ top opponents, criticized Bores’ RAISE Act as being “watered down” compared to how it was initially presented. He also went after the assemblymember’s promise to regulate the technology while being backed by those in the industry.

“When I hear someone talking about AI regulation who is being bankrolled by the AI industry, that reminds me of people who go in saying they’re gonna tackle fossil fuels and are actually taking money on the side from oil and gas companies,” Schlossberg said. “If we’re gonna be regulating AI, and we think it is the important issue that it is, we should have disinterested regulators, not those who have been bankrolled by one company and not another.”

Bores will often tout his record in the Legislature, where he has served since 2023. A common refrain is he was recognized by the Center for Effective Lawmaking as the “most effective new legislator” from the city and that he’s passed more than 30 bills.

But on what’s become his hallmark issue, Bores hasn’t always been a “yes.”

He has been supportive of dozens of AI-related bills, but on a handful of occasions, he’s been a detractor on bills aimed at addressing guardrails around technology and AI. That legislation includes:

A4550, which would require the Department of Labor to study the long-term impact of artificial intelligence on the state workforce. Bores was the only one in the Labor Committee to vote no.
A773, which would require some banks to conduct assessments on artificial intelligence in lending decisions and require applicants to consent to the technology. Bores was the only Democrat to vote against the legislation in the Codes Committee, joining Republicans.
A3779, which would put restrictions on automated employment decision tools in hiring. He was the only no vote in both the Labor and Codes committees.
A9430, also known as the LOADinG Act, which was touted as a “first in the nation legislation” to provide oversight of how state agencies use automated decision-making. Bores voted for it in the Science and Technology Committee, but then was one of two Democrats to vote against it on the floor.
A4983, which provides protections regarding health data. He voted for it in the Science and Technology Committee, and then against it in Codes.

Bores expressed concerns about the specifics of these bills. With the bill on automated employment tools, for instance, he said the legislation “wasn’t addressing whether AI is the final decision, it was adding on a costly impact assessment without changing the actual standards of when bias occurs.” On the bank assessment bill, the assessments wouldn’t apply to national banks — and federal law already prohibits against discrimination for financial lending. A sticking point in the Labor Department bill was that AI use “to displace any human work” was prohibited until a study comes out at the latest in 2034.
“I think if we put forward requirements of assessments on small businesses that we’re not even estimating the cost of, then maybe we’re trying to talk about only a ban on small businesses while letting the biggest companies run wild,” he said. “You have to think about the impact of any legislation.”

Prior to his affirmative committee vote for the LOADinG Act, Bores raised concerns about applying too broad of a definition to biased outcomes, leading to his no vote on the floor. But he later approved the chapter amendment and A8295, spearheaded by the same sponsors of the LOADinG Act, which requires state government agencies to conduct impact assessments and disclose the use of automated decision-making tools.

Bores also had concerns about the definition of health data and a 24-hour waiting period to process health information in A4983. The next year, he voted in favor of a reworked version of the bill, which Gov. Kathy Hochul then vetoed for having “broad” definitions and scope, “creating potentially significant uncertainty about the information subject to regulation and compliance challenges for consumers, businesses and nonprofits.”

“AI is a deeply serious issue that requires legislators who are willing to dive into the details to make sure that New Yorkers and Americans are protected, and also that our laws are ones that actually achieve the goals they set out to do,” Bores said of his past votes. “I’ve always been a legislator that actually reads bills and actually picks up on specific revisions, and I engage with my colleagues in all of that, whether the topic is AI or anything else.”

Bores isn’t the only one who’s relying on his legislative record on tech and AI. A recent mailer from fellow Assemblymember Micah Lasher — another frontrunner for the seat — vowed the hopeful would “fight for a national ban on social media for kids under 16” and described him as a member of Congress who “will stand up to the tech titans.” The mailer also touts a long list of legislation he’s worked on that’s “protecting our kids from the dangers of social media and AI.” That includes a bill prohibiting AI chatbots from using features harmful to kids — legislation introduced by Bores that Lasher co-sponsored.

“When it comes to social media, it feels like we’ve been on autopilot for years,” Lasher writes in the mailer. “Letting a handful of tech giants make decisions — business decisions — that have enormous consequences for all of us, especially our kids.”

Schlossberg, who repeatedly goes after the AI-linked money pouring in to support Bores, has called for a federal investigation into rental car companies using AI to scan for damages and tack on fees. He also recently criticized Bores for missing AI-related votes in the Legislature, to which Bores replied, “I’m happy to put my legislative record up against anyone.”

A version of this report first appeared in New York Playbook. Subscribe here.

Congress

Senate Ethics dismisses allegations against Ruben Gallego

Published

1 hour ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The Senate Ethics Committee has dismissed allegations of misconduct levied against Sen. Ruben Gallego, who stood accused by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of “campaign finance violations and inappropriate conduct of a sexual nature.”

The charges came following the resignation of the Arizona Democrat’s longtime friend, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), who was forced to step down amid accusations of serious sexual misconduct. Luna, a Florida Republican, sought to implicate Gallego by claiming in an interview on CBS that a woman would come forward about an “incident that occurred between the two of them at the same time and the event was sexual in nature allegedly.”

But in a letter to Gallego sent Monday — which he shared in a public news release — the notoriously inactive Ethics Committee cited Gallego’s “prompt contact with the Committee following media reports of the allegations and appreciated your full cooperation with the Committee throughout the investigation.”

Gallego has maintained he was unaware of the allegations against Swalwell and said in a statement he was a victim of “right-wing conspiracies peddled by far-right activists like Anna Paulina Luna, the White House, and their allies.”

He continued, “I look forward to an apology from Rep. Luna for weaponizing the ethics process while refusing to investigate historic corruption that’s making life harder for families.”

Luna, in a post on X, defended her referral to the Senate Ethics Committee.

“The good news about DC is everyone talks, and eventually the reporters come forward with your texts,” Luna wrote on social media. “Do yourself a favor and keep raising for your legal defense fund. Once a creep always a creep, and you’re gonna need it.”

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this report misstated Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s state. She represents Florida.

Congress

Rubio, Witkoff to brief Congress on Iran

Published

5 hours ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Top deputies of President Donald Trump will brief Congress on the Iran peace talks in a Monday conference call — the first time administration officials have addressed a broad group of lawmakers since Trump signed a “memorandum of understanding” with Tehran earlier this month.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, will lead the briefing for all House and Senate members at 4 p.m., according to seven people granted anonymity to discuss the private meeting.

Republicans and Democrats have called for more transparency about the 14-point agreement inked on June 18, which initiated a cease-fire between the two countries. Since then, the U.S. and Iran have continued to engage in hostilities.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Red, white and GOP hard-liner blues

Published

7 hours ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House Republicans finally cleared a runway this week to finish some of their top legislative priorities before the July 4 recess.

That is, unless a small band of hard-liners trip up those plans at takeoff.

Speaker Mike Johnson is hoping to move quickly to pass fiscal 2027 appropriations legislation, the annual defense policy bill and a kids online safety bill that has been years in the making. The movement comes after President Donald Trump instructed GOP hard-liners to stop holding up a procedural vote amid a protest from Rep. Anna Paulina Luna and others that the Senate hadn’t passed Trump’s election security bill.

But Luna and other hard-liners are still threatening to tank the procedural vote that could delay the defense policy bill and other measures until they get concessions on the SAVE America Act, amid other demands.

Johnson, for example, had also promised hard-liners a vote before July 4 on a sweeping GOP immigration bill introduced in the prior Congress as H.R. 2, which is highly unlikely to happen.

Johnson for his part has said the House will “pass the SAVE America Act again” by folding parts of it into a third party-line reconciliation bill. But the slimmed-down version he’d need to pursue in order to meet strict Senate rules for the budget process is already being panned by hard-liners as insufficient.

That reconciliation bill is also already delayed. House Republicans aren’t on track to meet their goal of advancing its framework before the July 4 recess as members on the Budget panel balked over how to pay for the legislation in a closed-door meeting last week.

“Time is of the essence, given how many legislative days we have,” House Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie, who is sponsoring the kids online safety legislation, said in an interview last week. “If we lose a week, that would be important.”

Meanwhile, Democratic leadership is grappling with their own heated internal divisions this week. Members are split over supporting the adoption of an amendment to a fiscal 2027 spending bill from Rep. Thomas Massie that would end Israel aid and cut the overall foreign military aid program by $3.3 billion.

Appropriations ranking member Rosa DeLauro did not instruct her colleagues on how to vote during a rare Sunday evening caucus call, two sources granted anonymity to discuss the private meeting tell Mia and Riley. Leaders did, however, criticize the amendment as poorly written.

One other item this week that could split members of each party: House lawmakers are also slated to vote on a rewritten war powers resolution from Rep. Rashida Tlaib to reign in Trump administration military actions in Lebanon. Leadership worked with Tlaib to come up with new language last month that is expected to garner more Dem support, but the resolution is still expected to fail without GOP votes.

What else we’re watching:

— SENATE GOP GETS ANTSY ABOUT NOMINATIONS: Some Republican senators are unsettled by Trump’s apparent lack of urgency in filling vacant posts, even as GOP control of the chamber beyond the midterms is increasingly in doubt. There are more than two dozen federal court vacancies. Labor secretary, FDA commissioner and scores of other open positions do not have nominees, and a senior White House official said Trump is in no rush to fill them. “We’re running short on time,” said Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a member of Senate HELP, which oversees health, labor and other issues.

—RICK SCOTT SAYS HE’S JUST TRYING TO HELP: Fresh off his controversial Trump invite to a Senate GOP lunch last week, Sen. Rick Scott told Blue Light News in an interview he’s trying to make a mark — not trying to challenge Senate Majority Leader John Thune. Scott insists that neither his invitation to the president nor a letter he circulated afterward outlining how the Senate GOP should be preparing for the midterms should be seen as a prelude to a leadership challenge. The Florida Republican said he’s perfectly happy running the conference’s conservative Steering Committee and predicted Thune would easily secure another term as leader. What has become eminently clear in recent weeks is that Scott — after a long career in business, two terms as governor and nearly eight years as senator — just isn’t a back-bench kind of guy.

Meredith Lee Hill, Riley Rogerson, Alex Gangitano, Jordain Carney and Cheyenne Haslett contributed to this report.