AI safety advocates ask Newsom for special session; AG races to watch in the midterms

Christine Moy (0:02)

Hello, and welcome to Decoded by POLITICO. I'm Christine Moy.

Calder McHugh (0:06)

And I'm Calder McHugh. Today on the show, we'll discuss the Attorney General races to watch in next week's midterm elections. Plus, an exclusive letter from National AI Safety Groups puts California Governor Gavin Newsom's AI record on blast.

Christine, you've been reporting on our first story today. I'd love to hear a little bit about it.

Christine Moy (0:25)

Yeah. So two national advocacy groups are pushing Newsom to call a special legislative session on AI safety.

I talked to Shawna Thomas about this. She's the co-founder of the National AI Safety Group, Guardrails Action and its affiliated Super PAC. And she's framing this as potentially one of Newsom's last big opportunities to shore up California's safety regulations before he leaves office.

Shauna Thomas (0:53)

This is, I think, the most significant opportunity that exists, which is crucial, right, on the policy front, on the safety front. And I think it's important on the political front, particularly for somebody like Governor Newsom, who's looking at a potential bid for the presidency in 2028

Christine Moy (1:09)

The Hurt Group, Guardrails Action, along with Demand Progress, sent a letter to Newsom on Thursday, which they shared exclusively with us. And what's interesting here is that they're making both a policy argument and a political argument. So on the policy side, they say California needs to move much faster to address emerging AI risks, including some ones that popped up later this year, when a lot of legislative sessions were already underway. So you'll remember things like just these autonomous hacking incidents we've seen after the open AI and hugging phase incident.

And also these like viral existential warnings that have been made by AI industry researchers. But politically, these groups are also saying that Newsom, who's one of the top names considering a possible presidential run in 28, has something to prove on AI safety, particularly after his controversial veto of a major AI safety bill two years ago.

Calder McHugh (2:03)

You know, Christine, I'm curious what these advocates are exactly hoping to achieve with a special session in particular.

Christine Moy (2:11)

So there are two main things that they want to see. First, like Newsom actually already has a process underway. He's been teasing the prospect of a special session as early as six weeks ago. And then in September, he signed an executive order that's convening a panel of experts to recommend ways to expand California's AI regulations. And those recommendations are expected next month. So the panel is looking at ideas like requiring AI companies to bring in independent auditors, developing so-called like AI kill switches, right, which could shut down dangerous or rogue mottos.

And these groups are saying that's a good starting point, but they want Newsom to commit to acting on those recommendations while he's still governor rather than leaving them for the next administration. The other thing is that they want lawmakers to revisit provisions from SB 1047 This is a major AI safety bill that Newsom vetoed in 2024, and particularly provisions that have to do with legal liability for harms caused by AI mottos. And some of these ideas didn't make it into SB 53, which is the landmark AI safety law that Newsom signed last year.

Calder McHugh (3:17)

Is there any chance he's actually going to call this session?

Christine Moy (3:20)

Well, this is the most explicit demand yet from advocates, and it's coming from a national group, which is interesting. I asked about that. They said they have a more expansive view of how the politics of AI have shifted, but they observed a similar thing from advocates in California, not necessarily at the prospect of a special session. When Newsom put out his EO, we talked to a couple of AI advocates about this, and they said that that doesn't necessarily preclude Newsom from calling a special session, but he's left the door open. He said most recently on the last day that he was signing bills in California that it was still on the table, but again, it's been several weeks since then.

And that's what these groups are really pressing him on. We reached out to Newsom's office on this letter and on the remarks that Shauna and Colin made here, and they didn't get back to us with a response.

Calder McHugh (4:12)

To your point about the national implications of this, I think both of these groups, like you said, obviously have a national footprint.

Guardrails is spending and races nationally, and they both really buy the idea that AI politics have really shifted in their direction, that advocating for safety, more AI safety is something that can be politically advantageous, and that even though Newsom vetoed this bill in particular in California last year, the politics of the situation have changed to the extent that now they can demand some of the things that maybe they weren't in a position to before. I mean, guardrails didn't even exist when Newsom first vetoed that bill. I do think it's notable as well that both of these groups are largely connected with the progressive movement in America. They're staffed by progressives in large part, and they might already have a frosty relationship with Newsom, who has been a little more friendly towards big tech, and might in general not be, you know, a potential presidential candidate who they would want to see win the nomination.