US House Subcommittee Hearing on AI Regulation
The United States House Energy & Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade held a hearing titled “AI Regulation and the Future of US Leadership” on May 21, 2025. The hearing featured witnesses from various organizations, including the AI Now Institute, R Street Institute, US Chamber of Commerce, and General Catalyst.
Key Discussions
-
Proposed 10-Year Moratorium: Republicans on the committee supported a proposed 10-year moratorium on the enforcement of state AI laws, arguing it would prevent a patchwork of state regulations and allow Congress to craft a national framework. Democrats opposed the moratorium, calling it a “giveaway” to Big Tech that would leave consumers unprotected.
-
National Framework for AI Regulation: Witnesses and committee members discussed the need for a federal approach to AI regulation to ensure consistency and prevent a fragmented regulatory landscape across states.
-
Concerns About EU AI Act: The European Union’s AI Act was criticized for being overly complex and restrictive, potentially stifling innovation. Witnesses warned that adopting a similar approach in the US could harm American competitiveness.
Key Quotes
“I think it is absolutely something we should say zero time — zero time as we watch AI develop, not 10 years.” – Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL)
“A patchwork of various state laws is not good for innovation, for business or consumers, and that is what we’re trying to avoid.” – Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-ID)
Witness Testimonies
-
Sean Heather (US Chamber of Commerce): Expressed concerns about the EU AI Act’s impact on US businesses and advocated for a moratorium on state AI regulation to prevent a patchwork of laws.
-
Amba Kak (AI Now Institute): Opposed the moratorium, arguing it would leave consumers vulnerable to AI-related harms without federal protections.
-
Adam Thierer (R Street Institute): Supported a moratorium on state AI regulation, citing the need for a national framework to promote innovation and prevent regulatory fragmentation.
-
Marc Bhargava (General Catalyst): Advocated for a national regulatory framework that promotes safety, protects fundamental rights, and is transparent, while enabling innovation and global competitiveness.
Conclusion
The hearing highlighted the complex and contentious nature of AI regulation in the US. While there is agreement on the need for a national framework, disagreements persist over the proposed moratorium on state AI laws and the appropriate level of regulation to balance innovation with consumer protection.
