HARRISBURG, Pa. — A bipartisan pair of Pennsylvania lawmakers reacted with outrage Wednesday morning to word of a new federal attempt to rapidly enact a prohibition to keep states from regulating artificial intelligence.

The fast-developing industry that already has changed portions of society has relatively few legal guardrails on it. Earlier this year, a provision was inserted into the so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” to block states from regulating artificial intelligence, but it was stripped out after a public uproar.

“It is really frustrating that Congress is again attacking state sovereignty,” said Allegheny County Rep. Natalie Mihalek, a Republican and a mother of three. She cited the growing widespread, concern about harmful AI chatbots as an example of an AI sub-category where state regulation might improve things for everyday people.

The latest attempt to push states to the sidelines in AI lawmaking is being carried out as lawmakers consider the National Defense Authorization Act, according to Chris Mackenzie, a spokesperson for the Washington-based nonprofit Americans for Responsible Innovation. ARI focuses on public advocacy on emerging technologies.

Versions of the NDAA that contained no language regarding states and AI regulation have passed both the U.S. House and Senate, Mackenzie said. But, he said, new, additional language is being considered during the “conferencing” of the different versions that effectively bans state lawmaking on AI.

That conferencing process makes it possible “to air-drop in provisions” that were not in either of the two original bills, Mackenzie said.

And, he said, even though the public has not seen any prospective new language in a conferenced bill “they are trying to finalize the NDAA by Thanksgiving.”

In Pennsylvania, the Democratic head of a state House committee that deals with AI, Rep. Joe Ciresi of Montgomery County, said he planned to call U.S. Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana. The Republican majority leader in the U.S. House, Scalise was described in a media report and by ARI as being involved in the attempt to insert language banning states from AI lawmaking.

“We can’t let this be willy-nilly. This isn’t Democratic or Republican. This is about people,” Ciresi said. “Giving this industry free rein to do whatever it wants doesn’t help people.”

In May, when the omnibus “Big Beautiful Bill” legislation was being crafted, attachment of language to the bill against state AI lawmaking triggered widespread pushback.

“Leaving Americans entirely unprotected from the potential harms of AI” was the bill’s language was described in a letter of objection to Congressional leaders, signed by 40 state attorneys general including Pennsylvania’s Dave Sunday.

A separate letter of objection to the attempted federal AI lawmaking takeover came from more than 200 state lawmakers around the country. They included Pennsylvania Sen. Jay Costa of Allegheny County, the top Democrat in the Senate, and at least 29 other members of the General Assembly.

On Wednesday, Mihalek said she had already signed a new letter of objection tied to the effort involving Scalise. Ciresi said he planned to sign the letter of objection.

Taking state lawmaking bodies out of the equation of regulation AI would help further “a dangerous situation for our kids,” Mihalek said.

The Associated Press recently reported on research that found that one well-publicized chatbot“will tell 13-year-olds how to get drunk and high, instructed them on how to conceal eating disorders and even compose a heartbreaking suicide letter to their parents.”

Mihalek said state lawmaking bodies have the ability to deal with such emerging threats much more quickly than the federal government.

She said, “We can’t wait five years for Congress to do something.”

_____

©2025 PG Publishing Co. Visit at post-gazette.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.