President Donald Trump’s plan to promote America’s AI dominance involves discouraging “woke AI,” slashing state and federal regulations, and laying the groundwork to rapidly expand AI development and adoption. Trump’s proposal, released on July 23rd, is a sweeping endorsement of the technology, full of guidance that ranges from specific executive actions to directions for future research.
Some of the new plan’s provisions (like promoting open-source AI) have garnered praise from organizations that are often broadly critical of Trump, but the loudest acclaim has come from tech and business groups, whose members stand to gain from fewer restrictions on AI. “The difference between the Trump administration and Biden’s is effectively night and day,” says Patrick Hedger, director of policy at tech industry group NetChoice. “The Biden administration did everything it could to command and control the fledgling but critical sector … The Trump AI Action Plan, by contrast, is focused on asking where the government can help the private sector, but otherwise, get out of the way.”
Others are far more ambivalent. Future of Life Institute, which led an Elon Musk-backed push for an AI pause in 2023, said it was heartened to see the Trump administration acknowledge serious risks, like bioweapons or cyberattacks, could be exacerbated by AI. “However, the White House must go much further to safeguard American families, workers, and lives,” says Anthony Aguirre, FLI’s executive director. “By continuing to rely on voluntary safety commitments from frontier AI corporations, it leaves the United States at risk of serious accidents, massive job losses, extreme concentrations of power, and the loss of human control. We know from experience that Big Tech promises alone are simply not enough.”
For now, here are the ways that Trump aims to promote AI.
‘Consider a state’s AI regulatory climate when making funding decisions’
Congress failed to pass a moratorium on states enforcing their own AI laws as part of a recent legislative package. But a version of that plan was resurrected in this document. “AI is far too important to smother in bureaucracy at this early stage, whether at the state or Federal level,” the plan says. “The Federal government should not allow AI-related Federal funding to be directed toward states with burdensome AI regulations that waste these funds, but should also not interfere with states’ rights to pass prudent laws that are not unduly restrictive to innovation.”
To do this, it suggests federal agencies that dole out “AI-related discretionary funding” should “limit funding if the state’s AI regulatory regimes may hinder the effectiveness of that funding or award.” It also suggests the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) “evaluate whether state AI regulations interfere with the agency’s ability to carry out its obligations and authorities under the Communications Act of 1934.”
The Trump administration also wants the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to take a hard look at existing AI regulations and agreements to see what it can scale back. It recommends the agency reevaluate investigations launched during the Biden administration “to ensure that they do not advance theories of liability that unduly burden AI innovation,” and suggests it could throw out burdensome aspects of existing FTC agreements. Some AI-related actions taken during the Biden administration that the FTC might now reconsider include banning Rite Aid’s use of AI facial recognition that allegedly falsely identified shoplifters, and taking action against AI-related claims the agency previously found to be deceptive.
‘Our AI systems must be free from ideological bias’
Trump’s plan includes policies designed to help encode his preferred politics in the world of AI. He’s ordered a revision of the Biden-era National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) AI Risk Management Framework — a voluntary set of best practices for designing safe AI systems — removing “references to misinformation, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and climate change.” (The words “misinformation” and “climate change” don’t actually appear in the framework, though misinformation is discussed in a supplementary file.)
... continue reading