Public sentiment towards the Senate's handling of AI regulation is overwhelmingly negative, characterized by frustration over the lack of transparency, accountability, and understanding of the legislation's implications. Commenters express anger at legislators voting on complex bills without proper review, fearing that corporate interests are prioritized over the welfare of ordinary citizens. Many calls for better regulation and accountability in the political process underscore a deep mistrust in Congress.

US Senate

Tech Companies

Voters

I'm telling the Senate to regulate the shit out of AI

oneofmanyany

Fuck Peter Thiel, Curtis Yarvin and all the other techno fascist freaks

whatsyournane21

Fuck AI and the tech bros that promote it.

elseldo

The senate will do what it's paid to do. By their lobbyists.

BrtFrkwr

Fuck AI and the tech bros that want wreak havoc with it

AlwaysLeftoftheDial

sabotaging our future is the entirety of their plan.

Bawbawian

I don't know, I need to research this more:

On the one side, I am very concerned about Capital controlling AI, as I can certainly envision a future wherein the usage of AI will widen wealth disparity and lead to suffering.

On the other side, I am somewhat concerned that the ability of AI to replace labor will be stifled by neo-Luddites, causing sectors of production that probably SHOULD be automated to continue as-is, and reducing the potential benefit of people not having to labor as much to maintain (or improve) their material conditions.

**I don't think a 10-year moratorium on regulation is wise at all, considering the rate of growth of AI.** but I could certainly see knee-jerk reactions from some groups preventing progress that could benefit workers and humanity as a whole: just like some people being against newer forms of energy production because it would impact coal miners.

Original-Document-62

In some ways the battle is already lost if we’re thinking ai is a mandatory part of our future. Expect people to retreat to (or further turn into vacation spots where non union low wage workers keep visitors happy) parts of the country and world that aren’t as ai-dependent as bigger cities.

FlanneryODostoevsky

This bill is about 1 thing: AI

(You heard it here first)

This thing was designed so both sides can put on a show. The end result will be: No A1 regulation. &amp; Tax cuts for the rich (albeit a smaller cut than right now)

Enough_Turnover1912

Public sentiment had been proven time and again yo have zero impact on either or not a bill makes in into law. Absolutely zero. 

I hate to be the one to break this to you.

Ok-Replacement9595

Regulating AI for 10 years, will only push these companies overseas, it will put U.S. companies 10 behind other countries

Stanford1621

The following submission statement was provided by /u/katxwoods:

---

Submission statement: Anthropic founder says about the controversial provision in President Trump’s megabill that would ban state-level AI regulation for ten years: 

**“If you're driving the car, it's one thing to say ‘we don't have to drive with the steering wheel now.’ It's another thing to say ‘we're going to rip out the steering wheel and we can't put it back in for 10 years,’”**

How do you think AI risks will play out if only the US federal government can make laws about it?

---

 Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1kv3hx8/house_passes_budget_bill_that_inexplicably_bans/mu6ahsj/

FuturologyBot

Whatever happened to states rights? 

Or does that only apply when it supports their particular political aims?

katxwoods

Submission statement: Anthropic founder says about the controversial provision in President Trump’s megabill that would ban state-level AI regulation for ten years: 

**“If you're driving the car, it's one thing to say ‘we don't have to drive with the steering wheel now.’ It's another thing to say ‘we're going to rip out the steering wheel and we can't put it back in for 10 years,’”**

How do you think AI risks will play out if only the US federal government can make laws about it?

The Byrd rule should prevent this but in not getting my hopes up

BBAomega

States Rights only apply to oppressing minority groups through vague Christian alchemy. 

Unrestricted AI regulation is good for none except those who intend to destroy whatever is left of democracy after 4 years of Trump and the howler monkeys at the wheel.

niberungvalesti

This should be removed through a parliamentarian challenge.

warren_stupidity

Why would the states rights party want to take away the ability of the states to regulate a very profitable and dangerous technology in their areas of influence?

Qubed

The bill as it stands will destroy the US economy for...ever.

It's so bad they're already estimating near 7% interest rates (have fun with those 10% mortgages if you can even get them).

The knock on effects will devastate use

lazyFer

They want to use AI as information control to define the reality of a vulnerable voting populace. It's part of their 1984-esque plan for dominating a hostile electorate.

frobischer

The party of States' Rights, ladies and gents. Really showing how strongly they stand behind their ideals, here.

Johnny_Grubbonic

Legit no one wants this shit and it's making our kids morons. Fuck AI and fuck these companies.

EngragedOrphan

Inexplicably?  Have you seen all the illegal regulation bans already made by this administration?

RLewis8888

What's the point in banning regulations? That's like getting into a car to instruct a child and telling them, "once you mash the pedal down, don't pick your foot up for anything, it's very unlikely you'll hit anything."

Automate_This_66

Everyone in the AI field that matters is saying please regulate us before we do something stupid.

America: land of the free baby!

Shirolicious

Tell me you have nefarious plans without saying it directly...

Elmer_Whip

Senators against illegal immigrants stealing jobs but totally fine with AI stealing them...

IncidentalApex

Dude, I hate to be a doomer I really do but 10 years of basically no AI regulation could be the great filter. It could get us there is what I mean. How far are we really from AI being able to do a lot of human level tasks, not  10 years unregulated, at least I don’t think so.

maggmaster

I am by no means a Trump supporter, but there's nothing "inexplicable" about this. The purpose is to prevent there being a patchwork of 50 different sets of regulations on AI services that are almost inherently nation-wide things.

It's a ban on *state* regulation, not *federal* ones.

FaceDeer

Again that word... inexplicably... there's a very clear and very obvious reason. Nothing inexplicable about it.

AndaramEphelion

This is almost certainly unconstitutional, not that that matters to the MAGA Party, and especially not after the SCOTUS bans district court judges from making nationwide injunctions.

thefuzzylogic

Its not inexplicable. They want the maximum fuck around time before they find out and we have to start regulating to keep people safe.

drdildamesh

In a working US, the House of Reps would have watched out for the people and the Senate would have watched out for the states. Instead, we got this....

parrot1500

It's not inexplicable at all. It's bribery by these extremely well funded AI firms.

CheifJokeExplainer

I take no position, but offer a point of view that may explain the action. 

The use of AI doesn't really respect state boundaries. It may make sense to have a set of national regulations to avoid the unnecessary complexity of different laws state to state. While it might be possible for large companies to have 50 versions of their offerings, small startups would be hard pressed to deal with this complexity. It is unclear if that is the goal of this law, but that is a viable reason to ban state regulations. It could spawn greater innovation from smaller companies and startups. It also would make AI cheaper for everyone in it because there would only be 1 version vs 50.

I'm not sure why 10 years was chosen. It does mirror actions taken elsewhere when lawmakers allowed a technology to mature before bringing in taxes and regulation. There were things done like this (not identical) for the Internet.  For AI, given the rapid increase in the technology, 10 years is a very long time

pinkd20

Starting to feel like skynet has already taken over at this point...

h3rpad3rp

Yeah it's not inexplicable at all - the idea is to prevent inconsistent state regulations in favour of federal regulation. Whether that's a good idea though is another question.

space_monster

Well, prepare to not have fresh water because states will no longer be able to regulate the massive amount of water required by AI data centers.

TheRexRider

This violates the 10th amendment and the anti-commandeering doctrine.  It is unconstitutional.  Given that federal AI legislation is still underdevelopment, congress has not demonstrated any clear intent to regulate the AI field themselves.

xeonicus

This country in particular is about to experience the biggest A.I. mindfuck/psyop and this bill is what has locked us into that course.

Ezekilla7

This shit is gonna confuse brainwash and dumb down the FUCK outta the population MAKE MORE OF IT AND NO REGULATIONS EVARRRR!!!

seeingeyegod

Well, I guess no laws to approve new data centres, no laws to approve new power plants for AI, no tax breaks for AI companies, no approval for AI mergers, or buyouts. No approval for AI tech in any business or government setting.

Gonna suck for all those states when the AI companies come calling and they just have to apologise and say "sorry, we can't regulate anything to do with AI".

nnomae

Great, well i guess i welcome our new AI overlords, not like i have much of a choice

lloydsmith28

welcome to your disinformation dystopia hyumon slave.

CPL593-H

It's not inexplicable.  Rich tech industry told them to so they did.

Fortestingporpoises

When this inevitably becomes law, wouldn't a challenge easily make it to the Supreme Court without impacting the rest of the budget stuffs from the bill?

kalirion

Inexplicably? Hm, I wonder if it has anything to do with the interests of the wealthy

OfficialMidnightROFL

Gee, I wonder who's idea that was.  Who would benefit from such a law.

skittlebog

That is rich coming from the "state rights" fetisjists.

krav_mark

The inclusion of that ban is a pretty big sign that they used AI to write the bill.

InsaneDane

I'm curious if this will also prevent states from limiting how many employees can be replaced by Ai. There are going to be a ton of companies cutting back their expenses to manage tariffs. Replacing people with Ai is probably one of the most seamless ways to do that.

harrismdp

What about state’s rights? This is absolutely the wrong move and has no clear justification or need.

UAoverAU

America is going to erupt. 
There is going to be a massive response to all of this shit.

chapterthrive

What do you mean inexplicably? Trump has significantly more control over the Federal as opposed to the State. Much easier to control the flow

daemon_panda

Either they are speed running to the Rapture or they've got alternative means of transportation parked on the dark side of the moon.

Fake_William_Shatner

Doubt it passes the senate and if they use reconciliation to try and pass it, this provision will have to be dropped since it has nothing to do with the budget.

braumbles

Nothing inexplicable about it...tech(VCs) poured money into DC to try to stop California who's dancing all around AI regs. Same thing with CA emissions standards and phasing out ICE cars

standover_man

Hopefully, States can sue to overturn this law if it passes the Senate?

And what are people predicting the Senate will do with this bill? They need 51 votes? And I've heard some Senators, like Rand Paul, have already said they're a no vote.

sonofhappyfunball

Hey, at least now I can now buy a silencer without going through the federal background check and paying $200.

airfryerfuntime

Leave it to Republicans to toady up to Rocco's Basilisk. On the whole, they never met even a hypothetical sadistic tyrant they wouldn't bend the knee to, LMAO.

Sweet_Concept2211

It's clear, I guess. They want to use it so that they cannot limit Palantir AI-based surveillance and possibly to promote propaganda.

California already rules against it.

nail_nail

gov't regulations are bad and are anti  FREEDUMB

we are too stupid to live

Both_Lychee_1708

It is unmanageable if each state has different rules

YnotBbrave

It’s amazing that they trust states to make decisions on women’s bodies, but they don’t trust states to make decisions over artificial intelligence. Someone help me make sense of this, please.

Choice-Pudding-1892

The Senate has given the green light for the upcoming budget bill to include a provision that would bar states from making their own laws regarding AI or face possible funding restrictions. This has caused a bipartisan coalition of 260 state lawmakers from all 50 states to write an [open letter](https://ari.us/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/State-Policymaker-Coalition-Letter-Oppose-AI-Preemption-6-3-25.pdf) to Congress urging them to pull the proposition from the bill: 
"The proposed 10-year freeze of state and local regulation of AI and automated decision systems would cut short democratic discussion of AI policy in the states with a sweeping moratorium that threatens to halt a broad array of laws and restrict policymakers from responding to emerging issues."

If this concerns you, please reach out to your Senate representative and let them know how you feel about the bill, particularly if your senator is a Republican.

wingblaze01

In what universe is that strictly budget-related? 

Due_Satisfaction2167

lets see dem states go ahead and regulate AI anyways and see it get challenged in court.

Independent_Shock973

So what’s the ulterior motive here other than what I assume is some under the table money. Is it so AI can be used to create fake stories and further influence voting habits or is it something even worse?

NoCoffee6754

Weird how states’ rights is no longer a concern.

Dr_Fishman

What? Man I guess the techbros have gotten to the parliamentarian. How this has any budget impact is beyond me. Total horseshit.

TaxLawKingGA

Jimimninn

[deleted]

Dic3dCarrots

Hello u/onekade, please make sure you read the sub rules if you haven't already. (This is an automatic reminder left on all new posts.) 

---
[Check out the r/privacy FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/wiki/index/)

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/privacy) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

So its gonna be the bad path of [AI 2027](https://ai-2027.com/), huh

SomewhereNo8378

Note that this form publicly lists your first name, last initial, state, and time submitted.

Extensive personal information is collected by the ACLU: [https://www.aclu.org/about/privacy/statement](https://www.aclu.org/about/privacy/statement)

KrazyKirby99999

It's going to be close to impossible not to have this happen.  The interstate clause comes into effect when the business crosses state lines and since virtually all AI services, utilities and installations are crossing state lines at a minimum for communications reasons and secondarily perhaps due to redundant primary power connections to differing power plants and stuff I'm not sure how AI being federally regulated is avoidable anymore than things like commercial tractor-trailer safety requirements due to physical movements throughout the state infrastructure networks.

Material_Strawberry

Its honestly bizarre to me

Makes me think i misunderstand something

Why cant somebody start up a nefarious ai company and then nothing can be done about it because its ai?

Samsoniten

This is going to be their undoing, some people will cut corners, mistakes will be made, and the law of unintended consequences will step in and its skynet all over again...

slartybartfast6

I'm confused by the wording here. Is this deal pro- or anti-AI? Banning AI regulation would be pro-AI, correct?

greg_r_

$500 million is basically nothing for NY and CA. that barely builds a few toilets in SF. 

There practically is no ban in that world in the two states that matter.

etzel1200

I’ll be damned. The wicked witch of the South actually had a positive impact here.

houdt_koers

What makes it past the Parliamentarian is so confusing. It just feels so arbitrary and stupid. The filibuster should not exist.

Bodoblock

5 years is still bad so this could be a good issue to highlight for midterms, because this could theoretically be walked back in the 2027 different reconciliation bill if Dems take the House.

Fish_Totem

Amid rising concerns over AI's unchecked growth, the U.S. Senate removed a controversial long-term ban on state regulation of artificial intelligence from a budget bill.

US Senate AI Regulation Debate

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want