AI ANIMUS: California’s preeminent artificial intelligence bills are colliding with cost questions and congressional concerns as they enter a decisive stretch. Arguably the two most sweeping and consequential AI proposals moving through the Legislature have sailed through votes so far: Sen. Scott Wiener’s measure requiring safety testing for large models and Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan’s bill meant to prevent bias in algorithms used to make automated decisions. But mounting resistance could make that smooth ride considerably bumpier as the bills face appropriations committees on Thursday. If they clear that critical chokepoint, they'll need to win floor votes and then convince tech-friendly, fiscally-cautious Gov. Gavin Newsom. For Bauer-Kahan, it could come down to dollars. The Senate Appropriations Committee estimated last week her Assembly Bill 2930 would cost billions of dollars to implement, which makes it a far harder sell in a budget deficit year. In an interview today, Bauer-Kahan questioned the committee’s math given that the specific costs the analysis delineates — like for state agencies to identify and report on algorithms — add up to the tens of millions. “I don’t know that I saw a lot of justification for that billions of dollars number,” Bauer-Kahan told Playbook, but “we’ve been working really diligently to offer up cost-cutting amendments.” (Committee staff didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on the calculations.) But the enormous price tag will provide fodder for opponents. Ben Golombek, the California Chamber of Commerce’s chief of staff for policy, said the cost reflected his organization’s warnings that the bill’s terms are untenably broad. “If those were narrowed, you’d be looking at a dramatically lower cost,” Golombek said. Meanwhile, Wiener is hearing calls from fellow Democrats inside California’s House delegation. Last week, Rep. Zoe Lofgren publicly opposed his bill. She was joined today by Rep. Ro Khanna, who, like Lofgren, represents part of Silicon Valley and has substantial ties to the tech industry. Lofgren and Khanna amplified and stamped political credibility on previous warnings — voiced increasingly loudly by AI companies and investors — that the bill would stifle a nascent industry and undermine California’s competitiveness. Wiener has countered that those concerns are overblown or based on false premises. Congressional Democrats’ intercession speaks to the legislation’s national implications. In the next three weeks, Sacramento could effectively set standards for the industry and the country — and the bill’s foes know it. So does Wiener. The San Francisco Democrat chided Lofgren by writing to her that he was forging ahead after Congress failed to regulate emerging technologies like social media — a theme that Bauer-Kahan echoed. “It’s cute that they’re coming out against legislation and failing to do anything,” she said. “If Congress were able to act, that would be the preferable route. They’re not.” IT’S TUESDAY AFTERNOON. This is California Playbook PM, a POLITICO newsletter that serves as an afternoon temperature check on California politics and a look at what our policy reporters are watching. Got tips or suggestions? Shoot an email to lholden@politico.com.
| 
