President Donald Trump issued an executive order (EO) on artificial intelligence in January in an effort to position the United States as a leader in AI, revoking the prior EO issued in 2023 by former President Joe Biden — something experts expected would occur.
The January EO calls for the development of an AI Action Plan; the RFI was issued to inform that plan’s creation. Comments were due March 15. Perhaps unsurprisingly, stakeholders across sectors had many recommendations to share in comments.
PUBLIC-SECTOR REACTIONS
In its submitted comments, the state of New York argued for the administration to prioritize three areas: global competitiveness and commercialization, intellectual property and research security, and energy innovation and sufficiency.
In the comments, authored by New York state Director of State Operations and Infrastructure Kathryn Garcia, the new administration is cautioned against making cuts to federal funding for scientific research and universities, as that could “threaten the talent pipeline that fuels AI advancements.” Similarly, the statement argues that the CHIPS and Science Act plays a key role in AI development by ensuring a resilient semiconductor supply chain.
The state’s comments also highlight its own efforts in AI leadership, including the Empire AI Consortium and AI training opportunities.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Senior Vice President of Economic Policy Tom Quaadman also authored comments, in which he referenced a statement from the first Trump administration calling for AI technologies to reflect U.S. values: “freedom, guarantees of human rights, the rule of law, stability in our institutions, right to privacy, respect for intellectual property and opportunities to all to pursue their dreams.”
The Chamber’s primary recommendations were to: 1) recognize trustworthy AI is a partnership; 2) adopt risk-based approaches to AI governance; 3) support private and public investment in AI research and development; 4) build an AI-ready workforce; 5) promote open and accessible government data; 6) pursue robust and flexible privacy regimes; 7) advance intellectual property frameworks that protect and promote innovation; 8) commit to cross-border data flows; 9) abide by international standards; 10) secure benefits for small- and medium-sized enterprises; and 11) leverage existing beneficial cyber defense uses of AI.
Its additional recommendations included addressing the need for consistency in what is currently a fragmented policy landscape, promotion of an open source AI ecosystem, and adherence to the risk management framework from the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
NONPROFIT-SECTOR REACTIONS
The National Conference of State Legislatures issued comments encouraging the administration to “solicit input from a bipartisan group of legislators as it begins and continues any stakeholder conversations and meetings to develop an AI action plan for America.”
The Technology Policy Institute (TPI)’s comments argue that AI policy should be approached like any other policy, by asking the question, “What outcome do we wish to achieve and how do we achieve it at the lowest cost?”
TPI recommends a clear AI definition be included in any policy. It also recommends having in place clear measures and outcomes prior to making policy decisions. It states that policy should not hinder innovation, and details that research and development for AI will require public-private collaboration.
The Center for AI Policy, a nonpartisan research organization, stated in comments that AI is currently “fundamentally insecure and unreliable,” urging the administration to introduce third-party national security audits for advanced AI.
The NewDEAL Forum, a nonprofit focused on shaping state- and local-level policy, focused on three key areas with its recommendations: making government more efficient, election security, and regulation.
The Center for AI and Digital Policy offered 10 key points to consider for the AI Action Plan, including public safety considerations, algorithmic fairness, and rights protections.
In its comments, the R Street Institute said: “The United States must continue to lead the world in AI to protect innovation and to ensure that other values our nation cherishes — pluralism, liberty, democracy, free speech, privacy, and civil rights — continue to thrive globally."
PRIVATE-SECTOR REACTIONS
Private-sector businesses also had input on the RFI.
Anthropic submitted comments with recommendations in two categories: 1) national security imperatives involving the safeguarding of technological infrastructure; and 2) investments the U.S. government should make in the country’s AI ecosystem.
“The more we can encourage companies to arrive at a common standard of information disclosure, the easier it will be for the federal government to have the information it needs to tackle the next few years — years which we believe will be pivotal for AI development,” Anthropic’s comments read, urging greater transparency from AI companies.
Palantir’s comments underlined that privacy is about both individual rights and national security.
OpenAI’s comments noted the importance of “democratic AI,” which it defines as “AI that is shaped by the democratic principles America has always stood for.”
