MAGA is split over the AI provision in Trump's Big Beautiful Bill
Mandel Ngan / AFP via Getty Images
- Trump's megabill includes a provision that would block states from regulating AI for 10 years.
- It's controversial even among some of Trump's strongest supporters.
- While Big Tech is largely behind the provision, at least one AI CEO has publicly criticized it.
It's "bad." It's "potentially dangerous." It's a "violation" of states' rights.
That's just some of what President Donald Trump's strongest supporters in Congress are saying about a provision in the "Big Beautiful Bill" that would block states from regulating artificial intelligence for the next 10 years.
Republicans who support the idea have argued that it's important to give the tech industry leeway, particularly amid an AI race with China, while preventing the rise of a patchwork of differing state laws. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, an enthusiastic supporter of the proposal, previously told BI that it's akin to the "light touch" approach that President Bill Clinton took toward the internet in the 1990s.
The loudest GOP opponent of the provision has been Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, who said that she was unaware of the AI regulation ban when she voted to pass the bill last month.
"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," Greene wrote on X earlier this month.
The Georgia congresswoman has vowed to vote against the bill when it returns to the House if the provision isn't stripped. Other Republicans like Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee are also against it, with Hawley vowing to work with Democrats on an amendment that would strike the policy from the final bill.
"I would think that, just as a matter of federalism, we'd want states to be able to try out different regimes that they think will work for their state," Hawley told BI last month. "On AI, I do think we need some sensible oversight that will protect people's liberties."
Trump himself has been quiet on the proposal, and the White House did not respond to a request for comment about his position on it.
Several Democrats have also spoken up against the idea, including Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, who characterized it as a giveaway to the tech world in a recent Substack post.
While the House version of the bill included a full-on ban, the Senate version is a bit more convoluted: States aren't outright banned from passing new AI rules, but if they do, they will lose millions in federal broadband funding. The same applies if states enforce AI regulations that are already on the books.
Big Tech is broadly on board with the idea, though at least one key industry leader has spoken up against it: Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei wrote in a New York Times op-ed earlier this month that a 10-year moratorium is "far too blunt an instrument."
"Without a clear plan for a federal response, a moratorium would give us the worst of both worlds — no ability for states to act, and no national policy as a backstop," Amodei wrote.
It is unclear whether the Senate will vote on stripping the AI provision, but it would likely happen shortly before the bill's final passage, which Republicans hope to accomplish before July 4.
After that, the bill could undergo further changes before lawmakers send it to Trump's desk.