For months, a fierce debate has been unfolding between lawmakers and tech leaders over how — or even whether — to regulate artificial intelligence.
Tensions spiked when U.S. senators stripped a controversial provision from President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” that would have blocked states from regulating AI for the next decade. The move revealed sharp divides within the tech industry and between both political parties over who should hold the reins on this powerful technology.
J.D. Vance speaks at AI Action Summit in Paris
In February, Vice President J.D. Vance spoke at the Artificial Intelligence Action Summit in Paris, France, in front of business and world leaders, where he outlined the Trump Administration’s regulation plans.
“We believe that excessive regulation of the AI sector could kill a transformative industry just as it’s taking off, because deregulating AI,” Vance said. “This doesn’t mean, of course, that all concerns about safety go out the window, but focus matters, and we must focus now on the opportunity.”
AI leaders answer questions at U.S. Senate Commerce Committee
In May, leaders from AI-leading tech companies ChatGPT, CoreWeave, AMD, and Microsoft answered questions from a U.S. Senate Commerce Committee focused on how regulations could impact American AI competitiveness with tech markets in China and the European Union. However, while each company said they leaned toward less regulation when it comes to AI, their thresholds for that regulation differed.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said he understands companies need guardrails when developing and deploying AI solutions, but too much regulation could stifle growth.
“I have the great honor to be one of the parents of the many parents of the AI revolution, and I think it is no accident that that’s happening in America again and again and again, but we need to make sure that we build our systems and that we set our policy in a way where that continues to happen,” Altman said. “Of course, there will be rules. Of course, there need to be some guardrails. This is a very impactful technology, but we need to be able to be competitive globally.”
CoreWeave CEO Michael Intrator testified that a patchwork of regulatory overlays will cause friction.
“And the idea that you can make an investment that could then become trapped in a jurisdiction that has a particular type of regulation that would not allow you to make full use of it is really very, very suboptimal and makes the decision-making around infrastructure challenging,” Intrator said.
Microsoft president weighs in on AI debate
At the hearing, Microsoft President Brad Smith outlined a more balanced approach to running the AI race.
“It is a race that no company or country can win by itself,” he said. “To win the AI race, the United States will need to support the private sector at every layer of the AI tech stack. The nation will need to partner with American allies and friends around the world.”
Concerning whether or not the federal government should open the door for U.S. States to deregulate AI, Brad Smith told KIRO Newsradio in a one-on-one interview, “States have long played a critical role in, say, protecting children, protecting consumers, and it would be a mistake, in our view, if federal legislation were to preclude their ability to do that, especially under laws of long standing.”
Many congressional Republicans who supported Trump’s proposed regulation moratorium said it would not only prevent a patchwork of rules and regulations, it would ensure American tech companies could compete with recent Chinese breakthroughs in generative AI, like the MiniMax platform that specializes in transforming text into videos and Deep Seek, a more cost-effective solution than leading American models like OpenAI’s GPT-4. AI has scaled faster than ever in China, thanks to a mix of optimism about technology and flexible regulations ready to ebb and flow to keep pace with the U.S. and European Union.
Congressman Adam Smith calls for regulation
For many Democrats like Congressman Adam Smith, not only does he think states and the federal government need regulations, he told KIRO Newsradio we should also adopt smart regulations worldwide.
“I’m particularly worried about the Trump approach of sort of, basically, America is going to operate on its own and do our own thing,” Adam Smith said. “Well, the rest of the world is going to do their own thing, and then chaos is the likely result in a whole bunch of different areas.”
Vance: ‘We must focus now on the opportunity to catch lightning in a bottle’
So, what is the right answer for regulating AI?
“Focus matters, and we must focus now on the opportunity to catch lightning in a bottle, unleash our most brilliant innovators, and use AI to improve the well-being of our nations and their peoples,” Vice President Vance said in Paris.
Using that analogy, strict regulation could be like keeping lightning locked tight inside that bottle. Less regulation could mean letting a little bit of that lightning at a time, but not enough to burn down the house. And complete deregulation could be like letting that lightning loose and just hoping it doesn’t torch everything around us.
For Adam Smith, he said the debate won’t be over anytime soon.
“I’m sure that what we saw the last few weeks was the opening chapter of what will probably become a book of debate and law, and regulation, and there’s a number of chapters still to be written,” Adam Smith said.
Follow Luke Duecy on X. Read more of his stories here. Submit news tips here.
