U.S. Senate votes on state-level AI regulation
According to Financial Times (FT), supporters of the AI proposal argued it would prevent a fragmented regulatory environment across US states that could compromise the country's innovation and competitiveness against China.
However, the proposal exposed rifts in the Republican party as some lawmakers pushed back against limiting state authority over AI, arguing it was a rapidly evolving technology with potential economic and social impacts, FT reported.
As a result, commerce secretary Howard Lutnick offered a potential compromise, voicing support on social media platform X for a shorter, five-year restriction instead. 'If we're serious about winning the AI race, we must prioritise investment and innovation,' he stated.
The amendment to Trump's bill was introduced by Republican senator Marsha Blackburn, who had previously suggested a similar compromise to shorten the moratorium to five years and allow limited state regulation, such as protections for artists and online child safety, provided it didn't create a 'disproportionate burden' on AI systems, Reuters noted.
However, Blackburn withdrew support for that proposition ahead of the amendment vote. 'Blocking states from regulating AI without a national standard in place would hand another victory to greedy big tech companies who put profits over people,' she explained in a post on X.
Indeed, FT reported that critics including AI safety advocates warned that leaving the industry to self-regulate could lead to harmful consequences as companies race to deploy advanced models.
Source: Mobile World Live
Image Credit: Stock Image
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
37 minutes ago
- The National
Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' is a boon to Democrats, but don't expect them to seize the moment
The US has never been short of hideous or harebrained legislation from both liberals and conservatives. But President Donald Trump's "big beautiful budget bill,' passed on Thursday by Congress, outdoes anything in living memory. In one gigantic sweep, it enacts at least four major national initiatives, each of which would alone qualify as among the most appalling legislative acts in modern American history. It will constitute one of the largest transfers of wealth from poor and working Americans to the rich, involving major tax cuts targeted squarely at the wealthiest segment of society. It eliminates health care for anywhere between 12-17 million Americans currently reliant on the Medicaid programme. It massively increases funding for the military and, more importantly, the apparatus of apprehending and detaining in giant prison camps undocumented migrants and asylum seekers. And, in this process of slashing taxation while splurging on spending, it will supercharge an already alarming national debt. Perhaps the best summary of this legislation, likely to be the signature legislative accomplishment of Mr Trump's second term, came from independent Senator Angus King of Maine: 'This bill isn't just irresponsible, it's cruel. It is literally taking food and health care away from lower income and middle income people to give a tax break to millionaires.' That qualifies as an objective fact. Even many, if not most, of the bill's supporters are well aware that it's the height of irresponsibility. Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski confessed, 'Let's not kid ourselves', it's 'not good enough', resulting from 'an awful process – a frantic rush to meet an artificial deadline'. That was her assessment mere minutes after she cast the decisive vote allowing its passage in the Senate. Not good enough? Sign us up! The creation of a hard-core immigration police state will be another major step towards American authoritarianism and the bolstering of a "power ministry" closely aligned with the President. The administration hopes to arrest and detain thousands of migrants, most of whom will not have been convicted of crimes, every day in the coming years. Even if that is unlikely to happen, the swarming of masked and armed immigration officials swooping down on everything from school pick up zones, shopping centres, bus stops and houses of worship will certainly metastasise. Republicans are ignoring all other aspects of the legislation, particularly the dire healthcare impact, and emphasising the new anti-immigrant police state apparatus. This is so central to the Trumpian agenda that it virtually defines what it means to "make America great again". Mr Trump has expressed the need for scores of new prison camps for migrants, hoping that they will "morph into a system where you're going to keep it for a long time'. He has also floated the idea of deporting some naturalised US citizens. A similar logic applies to health care. North Carolina Senator Tom Tillis said he couldn't support the bill and won't stay in the Senate (knowing he can't, without Mr Trump's backing) because Republicans are lying to Americans that there will not be massive healthcare loss. He asked what he's supposed to say to the 600,000 North Carolinians likely to suddenly find themselves without any health care after repeated promises that no such thing would ever take place, and warns of a political disaster. Even many, if not most, of the bill's supporters are well aware that it's the height of irresponsibility In effect, Republicans are performing a partial repeal of Obamacare, which they always hated but had been unable to find a workable alternative to and therefore have not been able to repeal. Gutting Medicaid gets them as close as they can under current circumstances. The main beneficiaries are the richest 1 per cent of Americans, who have seen their wealth steadily rise in recent decades as the rest of the country stagnates or declines. The national debt is so huge that servicing it is a greater expense than the vast US military. But making that problem worse – adding up to a staggering $3.4 trillion over the next decade – is apparently a small price to pay to secure additional benefits to those who need it the least. When it's defended at all, this largess is cast as economic stimulus. When the real pain – particularly the cuts to Medicaid – hits Main Street, the Democrats will receive an enormous opening for attacking Mr Trump, his agenda and his Republican allies. But it's unclear they'll be able to seize the opportunity. The immigration measures are likely to be relatively popular, and most Americans cannot be galvanised, at least at this stage, by appeals to preserve democracy and the rule of law. Rather, they are more concerned with their own daily struggles. To strike back at the Republicans effectively, Democrats will have to unite around kitchen-table issues, including health, taxation and the grotesque inequality of wealth that is being gratuitously exacerbated by a Republican party that falsely claims to be labouring in the interests of blue-collar, working-class Americans. Can they do it? I wouldn't bet on it. Republicans are much more unified, especially with Mr Trump ruthlessly enforcing a strict party line. Democrats are going to have to get over their structural problem of essentially being a coalition of diverse interest groups that tend to insist their specific issue is overriding and instead develop a message about Republican hypocrisy and unfairness that speaks to Americans as a unified national constituency. Rather than simply calling Mr Trump a would-be tyrant, they will have to argue he has reneged on key promises or failed to fulfil them. Going to political war on behalf of immigrants, the constitution or rule of law is likely to fail, whereas championing working Americans against a rapacious, grasping and obscenely indulged economic elite could be a tremendous political game changer. They will also need an effective national leader. At present, there's no sign of one. This ghastly bill ought to provide huge opportunities for a Democratic resurgence. But don't hold your breath.
The National
42 minutes ago
- The National
US imposes new sanctions against Iran oil trade and Lebanon's Hezbollah
The US has imposed new sanctions against a network that smuggles Iranian oil falsely presented as Iraqi oil and on a Hezbollah-controlled financial institution, the Treasury Department said. A network of companies run by Iraqi-British national Salim Ahmed Said has been buying and shipping billions of dollars worth of Iranian oil disguised as, or blended with, Iraqi oil since at least 2020, the department said. 'Treasury will continue to target Tehran 's revenue sources and intensify economic pressure to disrupt the regime's access to the financial resources that fuel its destabilising activities,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said. The US has imposed layers of sanctions on Iran's oil exports over its nuclear programme and funding of militias across the Middle East. 'As President Trump has made clear, Iran's behaviour has left it decimated. While it has had every opportunity to choose peace, its leaders have chosen extremism,' added Mr Bessent. The Treasury Department also issued sanctions against seven senior officials and one entity linked to Al Qard Al Hassan (AQAH), a Hezbollah-controlled financial institution. The armed Hezbollah group is Iran's proxy in Lebanon. 'These officials, through their management roles, have facilitated Hezbollah's evasion of sanctions, enabling AQAH to conduct millions of dollars in transactions through 'shadow' accounts,' said State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce. This comes as the Trump administration intensifies efforts to pressure Tehran into returning to nuclear negotiations and to clamp down on its proxies across the region. The US carried out strikes on June 22 on three Iranian nuclear sites including its most deeply buried enrichment plant, Fordow. The Pentagon said on Wednesday the strikes had degraded Iran's nuclear programme by up to two years, despite a far more cautious initial assessment that had leaked to the public. The US and Iran were expected to hold talks about its nuclear programme next week in Oslo, Axios reported. Said's companies and vessels blend Iranian oil with Iraqi oil, which is then sold to western buyers through Iraq or the Gulf as purely Iraqi oil using forged documentation to avoid sanctions, Treasury said. Said controls Gulf-based company VS Tankers, although he avoids formal association with it, the Treasury said. Formerly known as Al Iraqia Shipping Services & Oil Trading (Aissot), VS Tankers has smuggled oil for the benefit of the Iranian government and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is designated by Washington as a terrorist organisation, it said. The sanctions block US assets of those designated and prevent Americans from doing business with them. Hezbollah trying to rebuild its operations The Lebanese armed group Hezbollah has been severely weakened following a year-long war with Israel that ended in November. The US Treasury said the new sanctions underscore a commitment to disrupting the group's sanctions evasion schemes and supporting efforts by the new Lebanese government to limit Hezbollah's influence. 'Through their roles at AQAH, these officials sought to obfuscate Hezbollah's interest in seemingly legitimate transactions at Lebanese financial institutions, exposing these banks to significant AML/CFT [money laundering and terrorism financing] risk while allowing Hezbollah to funnel money for its own benefit,' said Deputy Secretary Michael Faulkender. 'As Hezbollah seeks money to rebuild its operations, Treasury remains strongly committed to dismantling the group's financial infrastructure and limiting its ability to reconstitute itself,' he added. Hezbollah has long been described as a 'state within a state' in Lebanon, maintaining its own military, security and social infrastructure that operates independently of government control. It also runs a parallel financial system, receiving funding from Iran and various independent sources, while managing its finances outside official state institutions. Ms Bruce said that Washington remains committed to supporting Lebanon by disrupting schemes that empower Hezbollah's destabilising influence. 'We will continue to employ all available tools to ensure that this terrorist group no longer poses a threat to the Lebanese people and the region,' she said.
Dubai Eye
42 minutes ago
- Dubai Eye
Trump says he expects Hamas decision in 24 hours on 'final' peace proposal
US President Donald Trump said on Friday it would probably be known in 24 hours whether Hamas has agreed to accept what he has called a "final proposal" for a ceasefire in Gaza. The president also said he had spoken to Saudi Arabia about expanding the Abraham Accords, the deal on normalisation of ties that his administration negotiated between Israel and some Gulf countries during his first term. Trump said on Tuesday Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war. He was asked on Friday if Hamas had agreed to the latest ceasefire deal framework, and said: "We'll see what happens, we are going to know over the next 24 hours." A source close to Hamas said on Thursday the group sought guarantees that the new US-backed ceasefire proposal would lead to the end of Israel's war in Gaza. Two Israeli officials said those details were still being worked out. Dozens of Palestinians were killed on Thursday in Israeli strikes, according to Gaza authorities. The latest bloodshed in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict was triggered in October 2023 when Hamas attacked Israel, killing 1,200 and taking about 250 hostages, Israeli tallies show. Gaza's health ministry says Israel's subsequent military assault has killed over 56,000 Palestinians. It has also caused a hunger crisis, internally displaced Gaza's entire population and prompted accusations of genocide at the International Court of Justice and of war crimes at the International Criminal Court. Israel denies the accusations. A previous two month ceasefire ended when Israeli strikes killed more than 400 Palestinians on March 18. Trump earlier this year proposed a US takeover of Gaza, which was condemned globally by rights experts, the UN and Palestinians as a proposal of "ethnic cleansing".
