Op-Ed: Favors for the rich kids — US executive order against state AI regulation is an incredibly stupid mistake
By Paul Wallis
By Paul Wallis
EDITOR AT LARGE
DIGITAL JOURNAL
December 13, 2025
A ChatGPT adult mode that OpenAI is aiming to make available early next year is expected to allow for erotic conversations between users and the chatbot - Copyright AFP VALERIE MACON
The last thing anyone expects from the US is realism or competence on any level. Total trade, diplomatic, and socioeconomic failure apparently isn’t enough, though.
Trump’s much-hyped executive order is to pre-empt and “target” states that pass their own AI laws.
This order is the brainchild of the Business Software Alliance, a consortium of stakeholders in AI like OpenAI and Microsoft.
The stated aim of the BSA is to “build trust among people, companies, and governments. Our mission is to ensure that responsible software innovation can thrive throughout the world”.
That’s ironic. Most critics think that this order is Federal overreach at its worst. There’s nothing remotely rational about removing so many law enforcement safeguards at any level.
The sheer depth of naivete and ignorance in this train wreck is astonishing. The brakes have been removed from an anything but roadworthy jalopy before it’s even been built.
These are the same guys who don’t know how to stop playing Monopoly and raising the cost of living to intolerable levels.
Rich kids with bought degrees who missed puberty completely and went into business instead.
The mere fact that half-ass laws like this could only even be considered by hyper-mediocre doormat “political people” doesn’t seem to have set off any alarm bells among the geniuses. It’s not like the administration and its related hangers-on know a damn thing about AI or anything else.
The theory here is to create one national framework for AI regulation. That would theoretically make sense if there weren’t a few massive black holes in the whole idea.
This order simultaneously ignores any and all civil law and the realities of current AI, let alone future AI. Does the Federal government want to take on all future AI legal disputes, yes or no? Do you have any idea how much that would cost? There’s no indication of the actual effects of this post-it note level one size fits all approach on IP disputes, conflicting commercial interests, or anything else.
The additional mediocre and shabby bunting to this Christmas fiasco is that it’s “to promote US AI innovation”. Like most Trump administration actions, it’s more of a PR stunt than anything like a workable policy.
The short answer to that is “what innovation”? Most of it is criminal AI behavior. Deepfakes, AI fraud, AI malware, etc? That’s innovation? You seriously think an executive order will have the slightest effect on any of it?
The stated aim of the administration is “US AI supremacy”. That’s a war that’s already been lost. It’s like Manifest Destiny, but in this case it’s Manifest Delusion.
Yet again, this senile version of America has decided that the rest of the world doesn’t or shouldn’t exist, so it can happily babble on to itself.
It’s more like one of those personalized storybooks for very young kids than policy. “Then Little Bozo signed an executive order so everyone would be rich and insular and butt-ugly and contented,” more or less sums it up in this case.
Yet again, everyone will have to route around the US to create a legal global AI framework that can actually work at all.
The world is tired of trying to tolerate this insanity.
December 13, 2025
A ChatGPT adult mode that OpenAI is aiming to make available early next year is expected to allow for erotic conversations between users and the chatbot - Copyright AFP VALERIE MACON
The last thing anyone expects from the US is realism or competence on any level. Total trade, diplomatic, and socioeconomic failure apparently isn’t enough, though.
Trump’s much-hyped executive order is to pre-empt and “target” states that pass their own AI laws.
This order is the brainchild of the Business Software Alliance, a consortium of stakeholders in AI like OpenAI and Microsoft.
The stated aim of the BSA is to “build trust among people, companies, and governments. Our mission is to ensure that responsible software innovation can thrive throughout the world”.
That’s ironic. Most critics think that this order is Federal overreach at its worst. There’s nothing remotely rational about removing so many law enforcement safeguards at any level.
The sheer depth of naivete and ignorance in this train wreck is astonishing. The brakes have been removed from an anything but roadworthy jalopy before it’s even been built.
These are the same guys who don’t know how to stop playing Monopoly and raising the cost of living to intolerable levels.
Rich kids with bought degrees who missed puberty completely and went into business instead.
The mere fact that half-ass laws like this could only even be considered by hyper-mediocre doormat “political people” doesn’t seem to have set off any alarm bells among the geniuses. It’s not like the administration and its related hangers-on know a damn thing about AI or anything else.
The theory here is to create one national framework for AI regulation. That would theoretically make sense if there weren’t a few massive black holes in the whole idea.
This order simultaneously ignores any and all civil law and the realities of current AI, let alone future AI. Does the Federal government want to take on all future AI legal disputes, yes or no? Do you have any idea how much that would cost? There’s no indication of the actual effects of this post-it note level one size fits all approach on IP disputes, conflicting commercial interests, or anything else.
The additional mediocre and shabby bunting to this Christmas fiasco is that it’s “to promote US AI innovation”. Like most Trump administration actions, it’s more of a PR stunt than anything like a workable policy.
The short answer to that is “what innovation”? Most of it is criminal AI behavior. Deepfakes, AI fraud, AI malware, etc? That’s innovation? You seriously think an executive order will have the slightest effect on any of it?
The stated aim of the administration is “US AI supremacy”. That’s a war that’s already been lost. It’s like Manifest Destiny, but in this case it’s Manifest Delusion.
Yet again, this senile version of America has decided that the rest of the world doesn’t or shouldn’t exist, so it can happily babble on to itself.
It’s more like one of those personalized storybooks for very young kids than policy. “Then Little Bozo signed an executive order so everyone would be rich and insular and butt-ugly and contented,” more or less sums it up in this case.
Yet again, everyone will have to route around the US to create a legal global AI framework that can actually work at all.
The world is tired of trying to tolerate this insanity.
“Regulating AI is winning issue for Democrats, but their own party leaders are too complicit with Silicon Valley to use it,” said one observer.
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a uly 25, 2025 press conference in Sacramento.
(Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
Brett Wilkins
Dec 12, 2025
C0MMON DREAMS
Polls show that a majority of US voters—and especially Democrats—want more robust guardrails on artificial intelligence, but Democratic governors’ silence on President Donald Trump’s directive banning states from regulating AI has some observers asking if lobbying by the powerful industry is to blame.
Sludge‘s David Moore and Donald Shaw reported Friday that tech titans including OpenAI and Meta last week sent a small army of lobbyists to meet with attendees of the Democratic Governors Association’s annual meeting, held this year at the swanky Biltmore Hotel in Phoenix.
RECOMMENDED...
Executive Order Attacking State AI Laws ‘Looks a Lot Like’ Industry Dictating Trump’s Policies
Hakeem Jeffries Pilloried for Putting Pro-Industry Democrats on AI Policy Task Force, Despite Voter Distrust of Big Tech
According to the report, lobbyists and governors—some of whom “are teasing White House bids in 2028 or rumored to be in the mix”—gathered for a closed-door meeting. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore were among those who reportedly met with the lobbyists.
Polls show that a majority of US voters—and especially Democrats—want more robust guardrails on artificial intelligence, but Democratic governors’ silence on President Donald Trump’s directive banning states from regulating AI has some observers asking if lobbying by the powerful industry is to blame.
Sludge‘s David Moore and Donald Shaw reported Friday that tech titans including OpenAI and Meta last week sent a small army of lobbyists to meet with attendees of the Democratic Governors Association’s annual meeting, held this year at the swanky Biltmore Hotel in Phoenix.
RECOMMENDED...
Executive Order Attacking State AI Laws ‘Looks a Lot Like’ Industry Dictating Trump’s Policies
Hakeem Jeffries Pilloried for Putting Pro-Industry Democrats on AI Policy Task Force, Despite Voter Distrust of Big Tech
According to the report, lobbyists and governors—some of whom “are teasing White House bids in 2028 or rumored to be in the mix”—gathered for a closed-door meeting. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore were among those who reportedly met with the lobbyists.
The meeting preceded Trump’s Thursday signing of an executive order aimed at limiting states’ ability to regulate rapidly evolving AI technology. The order directs the US Department of Justice to establish an AI Litigation Task Force empowered to sue states that enact “onerous and excessive” AI regulation. The edict also threatens to withhold federal funding from states that implement AI regulations that the Trump administration finds objectionable.
Democratic governors have been relatively muted on the order, especially given the overwhelming support for regulation of AI—which many experts say poses threats to humanity that may equal or outweigh its benefits—across the political spectrum.
As Moore and Shaw wrote:
While Democratic governors were silent, their Republican counterparts have been loudly arguing for months against the federal government preempting state AI policies. In June, 17 Republican governors sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune [R-SD] and House Speaker Mike Johnson [R-La.] warning them against preempting their states’ protections on AI use. Over the past couple months, a trio of Republican governors—Spencer Cox (Utah), Ron DeSantis (Fla.), and Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Ark.)—continued to make known their opposition to the Trump administration’s executive order.
Newsom, who many observers believe is eyeing a 2028 White House run, especially disappointed proponents of AI safeguards last year when he vetoed what would have been the nation’s strongest AI safety regulations.
It’s not just Democratic governors—congressional Democrats have increasingly partnered with an industry expected to soon be worth trillions of dollars. Some Democrats, like Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey, are personally invested in AI stocks. The AI industry also made record contributions to political campaigns during the 2024 cycle.
Other Democrats, including some who may have their sights set on higher office—notably Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York—advocate stronger guardrails on AI development.
“Voters want the party to get tough on the industry. But Democratic leaders are following the money instead,” Jeet Heer, national affairs correspondent for The Nation, wrote Friday.
Citing voters’ desire for stronger regulation, Heer argued that “Democrats have a tremendous opportunity to use the AI backlash for wedge politics,” adding that “it’s a way to win back working-class voters who are already disillusioned with the GOP and Trump.”
Citing voters’ desire for stronger regulation, Heer argued that “Democrats have a tremendous opportunity to use the AI backlash for wedge politics,” adding that “it’s a way to win back working-class voters who are already disillusioned with the GOP and Trump.”
No comments:
Post a Comment