How a GOP rift over tech regulation doomed a ban on state AI laws in Trump's tax bill
A controversial bid to deter states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade seemed on its way to passing as the Republican tax cut and spending bill championed by President Donald Trump worked its way through the U.S. Senate.
But as the bill neared a final vote, a relentless campaign against it by a constellation of conservatives — including Republican governors, lawmakers, think tanks and social groups — had been eroding support. One, conservative activist Mike Davis, appeared on the show of right-wing podcaster Steve Bannon, urging viewers to call their senators to reject this 'AI amnesty' for 'trillion-dollar Big Tech
monopolists.'
He said he also texted with Trump directly, advising the president to stay neutral on the issue despite what Davis characterized as significant pressure from White House AI czar David Sacks, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and others.
Conservatives passionate about getting rid of the provision had spent weeks fighting others in the party who favored the legislative moratorium because they saw it as essential for the country to compete against China in the race for AI dominance.
The schism marked the latest and perhaps most noticeable split within the GOP about whether to let states continue to put guardrails on emerging technologies or minimize such interference.In the end, the advocates for guardrails won, revealing the enormous influence of a segment of the Republican Party that has come to distrust Big Tech.
They believe states must remain free to protect their citizens against potential harms of the industry, whether from AI, social media or emerging technologies. 'Tension in the conservative movement is palpable,' said Adam Thierer of the R Street Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank. Thierer first proposed the idea of the AI moratorium last year. He noted 'the animus surrounding Big Tech' among many
Republicans.
'That was the differentiating factor.'The Heritage Foundation, children's safety groups and Republican state lawmakers, governors and attorneys general all weighed in against the AI moratorium. Democrats, tech watchdogs and some tech companies opposed it, too.
Sensing the moment was right on Monday night, Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who opposed the AI provision and had attempted to water it down, teamed up with Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington to suggest striking the entire
proposal.
By morning, the provision was removed in a 99-1 vote.The whirlwind demise of a provision that initially had the backing of House and Senate leadership and the White House disappointed other conservatives who felt it gave China, a main AI competitor, an
advantage.
Ryan Fournier, chairman of Students for Trump and chief marketing officer of the startup Uncensored AI, had supported the moratorium, writing on X that it 'stops blue states like California and New York from handing our future to Communist China.' 'Republicans are that way ... I get it,' he said in an interview, but added there needs to be 'one set of rules, not 50' for AI innovation to be successful.Tech companies, tech trade groups, venture capitalists and multiple Trump administration figures had voiced their support for the provision that would have blocked states from passing their own AI regulations for years. They argued that in the absence of federal standards, letting the states take the lead would leave tech innovators mired in a confusing patchwork of rules.
Lutnick, the commerce secretary, posted that the provision 'makes sure American companies can develop cutting-edge tech for our military, infrastructure, and critical industries — without interference from anti-innovation politicians.' AI czar Sacks had also publicly supported the
measure.
After the Senate passed the bill without the AI provision, the White House responded to an inquiry for Sacks with the president's position, saying Trump 'is fully supportive of the Senate-passed version of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill.'Acknowledging defeat of his provision on the Senate floor, Cruz noted how pleased China, liberal politicians and 'radical left-wing groups' would be to hear the news.
But Blackburn pointed out that the federal government has failed to pass laws that address major concerns about AI, such as keeping children safe and securing copyright
protections.
'But you know who has passed it?' she said. 'The states.'Conservatives distrusting Big Tech for what they see as social media companies stifling speech during the COVID-19 pandemic and surrounding elections said that tech companies shouldn't get a free pass, especially on something that carries as much risk as AI.
Many who opposed the moratorium also brought up preserving states' rights, though proponents countered that AI issues transcend state borders and Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce.
Eric Lucero, a Republican state lawmaker in Minnesota, noted that many other industries already navigate different regulations established by both state and local jurisdictions.
'I think everyone in the conservative movement agrees we need to beat China,' said Daniel Cochrane from the Heritage Foundation. 'I just think we have different prescriptions for doing so.' Many argued that in the absence of federal legislation, states were best positioned to protect citizens from the potential harms of AI technology.
'We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous,' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on X.Another Republican, Texas state Sen. Angela Paxton, wrote to Cruz and his counterpart, Sen. John Cornyn, urging them to remove the moratorium.
She and other conservatives said some sort of federal standard could help clarify the landscape around AI and resolve some of the party's disagreements.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
33 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
Donald Trump threatens ‘un-American' BRICS countries with 10 percent tariff
United States President Donald Trump has threatened to hike tariffs against the BRICS economic bloc after the group offered indirect criticism of trade wars and the recent military attacks in Iran. On Monday, Trump took aim at the 10-member bloc, which seeks to strengthen emerging economies, framing its interests as adversarial to the US's. 'Any Country aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS, will be charged an ADDITIONAL 10% Tariff,' Trump wrote in a post. 'There will be no exceptions to this policy. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' BRICS is named for its founding members, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. But it has grown to include other countries, such as Indonesia, Egypt, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. Over the weekend, the group held its 17th summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The meeting culminated in a declaration angled at promoting peace and global cooperation. But several items in the joint declaration appeared to be aimed at the US and its ally Israel, even though neither was identified by name. Under a section entitled 'Strengthening Multilateralism and Reforming Global Governance', for instance, the BRICS leaders called out the increasing use of tariffs in global trade. This seemed directed at Trump, who has threatened US trading partners with a suite of tariffs to negotiate more favourable trade deals and exact policy concessions. The US president has also called tariffs 'the most beautiful word to me in the dictionary', though many economists warn that the cost of such import taxes is often offset onto consumers. Trump has also championed the use of other protectionist economic policies, under the banner of his 'America First' agenda. But the BRICS leaders warned that these kinds of policies could backfire. 'We voice serious concerns about the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures which distort trade and are inconsistent with WTO [World Trade Organization] rules,' the BRICS leaders said in their statement. Such measures, they continued, could 'reduce global trade, disrupt global supply chains, and introduce uncertainty into international economic and trade activities, potentially exacerbating existing economic disparities'. The BRICS leaders also used their declaration to denounce the recent military strikes on one of the bloc's member nations, Iran. 'We condemn the military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran since 13 June 2025, which constitute a violation of international law,' they wrote, adding that 'peaceful nuclear facilities' had been targeted. Israel carried out the first attacks against Iran in the 12-day war on June 13, and on June 22, the US sent seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers to Iran to strike three nuclear facilities. Both Israel and the US have maintained that these actions were necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, though Iran has denied seeking one. In the wake of Trump's tariff threat, BRICS leaders rushed to assure their US counterparts that they are not seeking confrontation. Others, however, chafed at Trump's remarks. 'I became aware of what President Trump tweeted, and I think there needs to be greater appreciation of the emergence of various centres of power in the world,' said South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. 'And this should be seen in a positive light, rather than in a negative light.' Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva took an even blunter approach to Trump's threats. 'I don't think it's very responsible or serious for the president of a country as big as the United States to go around threatening the world through the internet,' Lula said in a question-and-answer session with reporters. 'It's not right. The world has changed. We don't want an emperor.'
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Donald Trump threatens ‘un-American' BRICS countries with 10-percent tariff
United States President Donald Trump has threatened to hike tariffs against the BRICS economic bloc, after the group offered indirect criticism of trade wars and the recent military attacks in Iran. On Monday, Trump took aim at the 10-member bloc, which seeks to strengthen emerging economies, framing its interests as adversarial to the US's. 'Any Country aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS, will be charged an ADDITIONAL 10% Tariff,' Trump wrote in a post. 'There will be no exceptions to this policy. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' BRICS is named for its founding members, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. But it has grown to include other countries including Indonesia, Egypt, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. Over the weekend, the group held its 17th summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The meeting culminated in a declaration angled at promoting peace and global cooperation. But several items in the joint declaration appeared aimed at the US and its ally Israel, even though neither was identified by name. Under a section entitled 'Strengthening Multilateralism and Reforming Global Governance', for instance, the BRICS leaders called out the increasing use of tariffs in global trade. This seemed directed at Trump, who has threatened US trading partners with a suite of tariffs in order to negotiate more favourable trade deals and exact policy concessions. The US president has also called tariffs 'the most beautiful word to me in the dictionary', though many economists warn the cost of such import taxes is often offset onto consumers. Trump has also championed the use of other protectionist economic policies, under the banner of his 'America First' agenda. But the BRICS leaders warned that these kinds of policies could backfire. 'We voice serious concerns about the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures which distort trade and are inconsistent with WTO [World Trade Organization] rules,' the BRICS leaders said in their statement. Such measures, they continued could 'reduce global trade, disrupt global supply chains, and introduce uncertainty into international economic and trade activities, potentially exacerbating existing economic disparities'. The BRICS leaders also used their declaration to denounce the recent military strikes on one of the bloc's member nations, Iran. 'We condemn the military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran since 13 June 2025, which constitute a violation of international law,' they wrote, adding that 'peaceful nuclear facilities' had been targeted. Israel carried out the first attacks against Iran in the 12-day war on June 13, and on June 22, the US sent seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers to Iran to strike three nuclear facilities. Both Israel and the US have maintained these actions were necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, though Iran has denied seeking one. In the wake of Trump's tariff threat, BRICS leaders rushed to assure their US counterparts that they are not seeking confrontation. Others, however, chafed at Trump's remarks. 'I became aware of what President Trump tweeted, and I think there needs to be greater appreciation of the emergence of various centres of power in the world,' said South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. 'And this should be seen in a positive light, rather than in a negative light.' Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva took an even blunter approach to Trump's threats. 'I don't think it's very responsible or serious for the president of a country as big as the United States to go around threatening the world through the internet,' Lula said in a question-and-answer session with reporters. 'It's not right. The world has changed. We don't want an emperor.'
Qatar Tribune
5 hours ago
- Qatar Tribune
Deals made by Trump since pausing his ‘Liberation Day' tariffs remain sparse
Agencies Just over three months ago, President Donald Trump unveiled his most sweeping volley of tariffs yet — holding up large charts from the White House Rose Garden to outline new import taxes that the U.S. would soon slap on goods from nearly every country in the world. But in line with much of Trump's on-again, off-again trade policy playbook, the bulk of those 'Liberation Day' levies in April were postponed just hours after they took effectin a 90-day suspension that arrived in an apparent effort to quell global market panic and facilitate country-by-country negotiations. At that time, the administration set a lofty goal of reaching 90 trade deals in 90 days. Now, with the July 9 deadline looming, the U.S. has only announced pacts with the United Kingdom and Vietnam — as well as a 'framework″ agreement with China in a separate trade dispute. News of these deals often trickled through social media posts from the president and, even when countries on both sides of a negotiation table made more official announcements, many key details — including timing — were sparse. The Trump administration has since hinted that some trading partners might get more time for talks. Over the July 4th holiday weekend, Trump said that the U.S. would start sending letters to certain countries warning that higher tariffs could kick in Aug. 1. Trump took to Truth Social on Monday to share letters he sent to the leaders of Japan and South Korea, declaring that both countries would see 25% tariffs on goods entering the U.S. starting Aug. 1. Even with negotiations ongoing, most countries have still faced a minimum 10% levy on goods entering the U.S. over the past three months, on top of punishing new taxes targeting foreign steel and aluminum as well as auto imports. The 90-day pause pushed back additional steeper rates, which Trump calls 'reciprocal' tariffs, for dozens of nations. Here's what we know about the trade deals announced since April. On July 2, Trump announced a trade deal with Vietnam that he said would allow U.S. goods to enter the country duty-free. Vietnamese exports to the United States, by contrast, would face a 20% levy. That's less than half the 46% 'reciprocal' rate Trump proposed for Vietnamese goods back in April. But in addition to the new 20% tariff rate, Trump said the U.S. would impose a 40% tax on 'transshipping'' — targeting goods from another country that stop in Vietnam on their way to the United States. Washington complains that Chinese goods have been dodging higher U.S. tariffs by transiting through Vietnam. It wasn't immediately clear when these new rates would go into effect or whether they would come on top of any other previously-imposed levies. Like most other countries, Vietnam has faced Trump's 10% baseline tariff for the last three months. On May 8, Trump agreed to cut tariffs on British autos, steel and aluminum, among other trade pledges — while the U.K. promised to reduce levies on U.S. products like olive oil, wine and sports equipment. The deal was announced in grandiose terms by both countries, but some key details remained unknown for weeks. When the deal was announced, for example, the British government notably said that the U.S. agreed to exempt the U.K. from its then-universal 25% duties on foreign steel and aluminum — which would have effectively allowed both metals from the country to come into the U.S. duty-free. But the timing for when those cuts would actually take effect stayed up in the air for almost a month. It wasn't until early June, when Trump hiked his steel and aluminum tariffs to a punishing 50% worldwide, that the U.S. acknowledged it was time to implement the agreement. And even then, U.S. tariffs on British steel and aluminum did not go to zero. The U.K. was the only country spared from Trump's new 50% levies, but still faces 25% import taxes on the metals — and Trump said that rate could also go up on or after Wednesday. The U.K. did not receive a higher 'reciprocal' rate on April 2, but continues to face the 10% baseline its peak, Trump's new tariffs on Chinese goods totaled 145% — and China's countertariffs on American products reached 125%. But on May 12, the countries agreed to their own 90-day truce to roll back those levies to 30% and 10%, respectively. And last month, details began trickling in about a tentative trade agreement. On June 11, following talks in London, Trump announced a 'framework' for a deal. And late last month, the U.S. and China both acknowledged that some sort of agreement had been reached. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that China had agreed to make it easier for American firms to acquire Chinese magnets and rare earth minerals critical for manufacturing and microchip production. Meanwhile, without explicitly mentioning U.S. access to rare earths, the Chinese Commerce Ministry said that it would 'review and approve eligible export applications for controlled items' and that the U.S. would 'lift a series of restrictive measures it had imposed on China.' More specifics about those measures — and when they would actually go into effect — were not immediately clear. But on Friday, the Ministry of Commerce acknowledged that the U.S. was resuming exports of airplane parts, ethane and other items to China. And when Trump first announced the framework on June 11, the U.S. had said it agreed to stop seeking to revoke the visas of Chinese students on U.S. college campuses.
