It’s only June. But the competition for the most bizarre, ludicrous political ads of the year has an early leader in the clubhouse.
Perhaps you’ve seen them, two spots backed by a six-figure ad buy targeting Congresswoman Lori Trahan (D-Third District) over the draft of her “Great American Artificial Intelligence Act,” a bipartisan effort to set up some federal safeguards against AI excesses.
In “Protect Our Rights,” footage of 1960s civil rights demonstrations morphs into a declaration that “those rights are under attack” (headline visual: “AI May Discriminate Against You At Work”). Then: “AI oligarchs want to roll back civil rights.” (Visual: “Musk’s AI Chat Churns Out Antisemitic Posts.”) And the kicker: “Rep. Lori Trahan is taking their side.”
Lori, no!
But that was just an appetizer for the second attack ad from the group Americans for Responsible Innovation (ARI). As a mournful rendition of “Amazing Grace” plays in the background, ominous news headlines roll out: “Mother says AI Chatbot Led Her Son to Kill Himself”; “Chatbot Hinted a Kid Should Kill His Parents”; “Chatbot May Have Advised Gunman in School Shooting.” And finally, a call to action: “Call Rep. Lori Trahan: Don’t Block State AI Guardrails.
What? According to a considerably less-inflammatory Boston Globe op-ed by ARI President Brad Carson, a former Oklahoma congressman, the Trahan draft, co-authored with Republican Jay Obernolte of California, “threatens to freeze state regulation of companies developing AI for the next three years.” While Carson acknowledges it “does not ban every state AI law” and “its sponsors are right that the draft legislation preserves laws of general applicability and many state rules that apply after deployment,” he insists that isn’t enough to shield the public from harm.
In an interview last week, Trahan pushed back.
“We actually take the toughest laws that have been passed at the state level today and we make it the national framework,” she said. “We do nothing to inhibit states’ ability around deployment. In fact, we even invite them to enforce those laws together with the federal Department of Justice, because everyone is a little fearful of under enforcement in a Trump administration.”
Who’s right? According to an analysis of the 269-page bill by Roll Call, “the bill would preempt state laws and regulation ‘specifically regulating the development’ of an AI model, with a three-year sunset. The bill specifies that preemption would not apply to laws related to the use or deployment of AI models.” (Read the bill for yourself here.)
ARI’s skepticism is understandable to anyone who’s had a good whiff of the craven, greed-crazed behavior of big tech pouring millions into avoiding accountability for or reform of the damage their products do to society. It’s a perspective shared by Trahan, who denounced a Trump effort last year to slap a broad ten-year moratorium on state AI regulation as “morally bankrupt.” And this week Trahan is endorsing strict new transparency protocols for so-called “frontier” AI labs like Meta, Google and Anthropic, an approach ARI’s Carson helped develop.
So what, exactly, is the beef that prompted those gruesome, pants-on-fire character assassination ads? Even Carson in his op-ed says Trahan is “right” to pursue federal AI standards.
But presumably, he signed off on the ads. With Trahan facing only token opposition for re-election, it’s hard to see what they hope to achieve besides alienating an ideological ally, or issuing a warning to anyone who dares work with Republicans.
It’s tough enough to find bipartisan ground on difficult issues these days, no matter how urgently action is needed. Strafing the playing field with rhetorical napalm doesn’t make it any easier to get something done.
