Subcommittee Democrats Applaud President Biden’s AI Executive Order for Protecting Civil Rights, Equity

Washington, D.C. (March 22, 2024)—Rep. Gerald E. Connolly, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and Government Innovation, led Subcommittee Democrats in examining the Biden-Harris Administration’s Executive Order (EO) 14110, which establishes standards to protect the safety and privacy of the public and address concerns about equity and civil rights associated with Artificial Intelligence (AI). 

 “The Biden-Harris Executive Order on AI, the first of its kind ever, elegantly balances innovation with equity and potential with pragmatism,”  said Ranking Member Connolly in his opening statement.  “The Biden-Harris Executive Order sets America on the path to lead the world in ethical, equitable, and transparent use of AI.”  

  The hearing included testimony from Dr. Nicol Turner Lee, Director, Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings Institute;  Mr. Adam Thierer, Resident Senior Fellow, Technology & Innovation at R Street;  Ms. Jennifer Huddleston, Technology Policy Research Fellow at Cato Institute;  and Mr. Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow at The Center for Growth and Opportunity.  

Subcommittee Democrats emphasized that the Biden-Harris Administration Executive Order promotes safe and responsible innovation in AI.   

• Ranking Member Connolly stated:  “The EO directed more than 50 federal agencies to take more than 100 different actions to guarantee responsible federal use of over the 700 use cases already implemented across 24 federal agencies.  Every agency should now have a designated chief AI officer and internal AI Governance board, which should work cohesively and collaboratively to manage the risks of AI while prudently removing barriers to innovation.”  

• In response to Chairwoman Mace’s question regarding the AI Executive Order’s effects on innovation;  Dr. Turner Lee clarified that “the White House EO on AI improves certainty and baselines for companies to better participate in the economy.”  Further outlining the pro-innovation power of the EO, she went on to note her “certainty” that the EO “will definitely not stifle innovation in many respects and actually help us to innovate better.” 

Subcommittee Democrats underscored how President Biden’s October 2023 Executive Order initiates a whole-of-government and private sector approach, establishing the United States as a global leader in ethical AI.   

• Ranking Member Connolly stated:  “We should look to partner with private sector partners to foster continued innovation and adoption of a secure and trustworthy AI.  I plan to introduce a bill that responsibly accelerates the use of AI by civil servants who are entrusted with carrying out our public facing agencies missions.”  
• Dr. Nicole Turner Lee testified that the Executive Order brings together “a whole of government approach that is thoughtful, participatory, coordinated and has [sic] been percolating for a matter of years.  More importantly, if Congress doesn’t act, states will, China will.”  
• Rep. Ayanna Pressley pointed out the dangers of AI without guardrails stressing that “algorithms trained on skewed, inaccurate or unrepresentative data magnify human biases lead to discriminatory outcomes.  The previous administration, for example, had an abysmal record of using technology to incarcerate and to persecute communities of color.  The Trump Administration used AI to identify legal protesters during the George Floyd protests, to employ racist algorithms with immigration and customs enforcement to profile Muslims entering the country, and to haphazardly arrest Chinese Americans during its China initiative.  Meanwhile, President Biden’s executive order takes unprecedented action to allow innovation while protecting people’s privacy and civil rights.” 

Subcommittee Democrats highlighted that Congress must play a critical role, working with the Administration and private sector partners to ensure continued innovation and adoption of secure and trustworthy AI.  

• Ranking Member Connolly criticized Congress’s inaction on AI noting that in the 118th Congress Members have proposed “28 bills addressing AI, not one has become law.  And given our pace, it’s unlikely any of them will become law in this Congress.  We’re not doing anything.  And when that happens, it seems to me the president has an obligation to address an urgent and imminent subject like AI.  And so even though I share [the witness’] passion about the prerogatives and responsibilities of the legislative branch—in this particular case I have to defend the executive branch.  They haven’t usurped Congress.  They’ve actually done what Congress ought to do but isn’t going to do because we’re not doing our jobs up here.” 
• Rep. Stephen F. Lynch contextualized the dangers of generative AI in an election, invoking prior congressional testimony from Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Christopher Wray in which he stated foreign adversaries intentionally interfered in the 2020 presidential election and that this election cycle the United States will face more adversaries moving at a faster pace, enabled by new technology.  Rep. Lynch quoted Mr. Wray’s assertion that advances in generative AI make it “easier for both more and less sophisticated foreign adversaries to engage in malign influence.”  To which Dr. Turner Lee responded that technology industry must “commit to helping us with a better digital watermarking system, being able to have conversations around copyright protections, [and] really determining ways in which we engage the public and general education so that they are more informed.” 

###