Bradley Tusk

We saw this White House issue an executive order in December telling states, you're not allowed to regulate AI.

And luckily, governors just from both parties roundly ignored that.

But there are areas where you're going to see Washington need to step up.

And I think whether or not they do so may dictate how this whole thing plays out.

Yeah, I mean, I think you almost have to think about it from a taxonomy of how to regulate AI because I've never, you know, I've been working around politics for over 30 years and there's never been anything quite like this.

So there's, in my mind, kind of four different categories.

The first is consumer protection, and that typically tends to be the province of state and local government.

So that's things like regulating chatbots, especially around things like mental health.

regulating data centers and the negative externalities that can impose on others, regulating the use of AI in hiring decisions, things like that.

The second would be catastrophic harm.

Like we've said, California and New York have tried to pass regulations or have passed regulations around frontier models, but that's two of 50 states.

And this is the kind of thing that really should be done by the US government.

The EU has a framework that covers, you know, 22 countries.

We have two states.

So that's number two.

Number three would be jobs.

And I don't think there is any plan whatsoever for how to deal with the fact that we could be seeing 10, 20 percent unemployment at some point because of AI.

And look, I do believe that at some point in 20 years or whenever it is, all kinds of new industries that we can't conceive of today will be created that will have a lot of jobs thanks to AI.

But a lot of people are going to fall through the cracks.

Look, that's why I think Andrew Yang was right way back, you know,