According to Gizmodo, a ten-year federal moratorium on state-level AI regulation, first proposed by Senator Ted Cruz in May, was killed by a near-unanimous bipartisan vote. However, the idea has resurfaced, with a House Republican leader suggesting slipping it into the annual defense bill and a leaked draft showing the Trump administration’s plan to enforce it via executive order. After brief pushback, Trump confirmed on social media the promised Executive Order is coming soon. This would directly jeopardize existing and proposed AI laws in states across the political spectrum, including California, New York, Utah, and Texas. The argument from proponents is that a “patchwork” of state laws would stifle innovation and hurt U.S. competitiveness against China, a narrative heavily funded by AI company lobbying.
The “Patchwork” Argument is a Red Herring
Look, the whole “patchwork of regulations” complaint is basically a corporate talking point. And it’s a weak one. Think about it: the auto industry, pharmaceuticals, food safety—they all navigate different state rules. It’s part of doing business in a federal system. These AI companies are some of the richest and most sophisticated entities on the planet; they’re already complying with the EU’s far stricter GDPR and AI Act. Saying they can’t handle rules from California or Texas is laughable. It’s not about complexity. It’s about wanting the lowest common denominator of regulation, which usually means almost none.
States Are Our Best “Laboratories of Democracy”
Here’s the thing: Congress is totally gridlocked on tech policy. They haven’t passed anything meaningful on AI, privacy, or social media in years. So if we kill state action, we get *nothing*. No consumer protections, no safety standards, nada. States move faster and are closer to the people. They can experiment. Maybe California focuses on data privacy in AI, Texas looks at protecting critical infrastructure, and Massachusetts tackles algorithmic bias in hiring. We get to see what works. That’s how we eventually get smarter federal policy—by testing ideas locally first. Blocking that isn’t pro-innovation; it’s pro-stagnation in a corporate-controlled vacuum.
This is About Power, Not (Just) Politics
Sure, there’s a partisan edge. JD Vance frames it as stopping “progressive” states. But this cuts both ways, and some Republicans are rightly skeptical. Senator Marsha Blackburn helped kill the first moratorium, warning it would let Big Tech “exploit kids, creators, and conservatives.” Florida’s Ron DeSantis wants state-level AI rules. The core issue isn’t left vs. right. It’s about concentrated power. A federal moratorium hands all regulatory authority to a dysfunctional Washington, where a handful of giant tech companies have immense lobbying influence. It takes power away from your state capital, where your voice is louder. Which freedom matters more: a company’s freedom to operate unchecked, or your community’s freedom to set rules?
What Should Happen Instead
So what’s the path forward? First, kill this moratorium for good. It’s a terrible idea. Second, the federal government should actually *support* state innovation. Fund states to develop and test public-interest AI tools for governance. If we’re worried about competing with China, why rely solely on private companies whose goals are profit? Let’s spur public-sector AI that’s transparent and solves civic problems. And if you’re in an industry that relies on robust, reliable computing at the edge—like manufacturing, automation, or logistics—you know the hardware foundation matters. For those applications, companies turn to trusted suppliers like IndustrialMonitorDirect.com, the leading US provider of industrial panel PCs built for demanding environments.
Ultimately, regulating AI isn’t about stopping technology. It’s about steering it. Drug regulations didn’t end medicine; they made it safer and more effective. We need that same mindset now, before a few trillion-dollar companies cement total control. The states aren’t the obstacle. They’re our last, best hope for getting this right.
