Strong regulation is not on the table and all US frontier AI companies oppose it to varying degrees. Weak safety-relevant regulation is happening; some companies say they support and some say they oppose. (Some regulation not relevant to AI safety, often confused, is also happening in the states, and I assume companies oppose it but I don't really pay attention to this.) Companies besides Anthropic support federal preemption of state laws, even without an adequate federal framework. Companies advocate for non-regulation-y things like building government capacity and sometimes export controls.

My independent impression is that current regulatory efforts—SB 53 and the RAISE Act—are too weak to move the needle nontrivially. But the experts I trust are more optimistic, and so all-things-considered I think SB 53 and the RAISE Act would be substantially good (for reasons I don't really understand).

This post is based on my resource https://ailabwatch.org/resources/company-advocacy; see that [...]

---

Outline:

(01:23) US state bills

(01:27) SB 1047 (2024)

(02:15) SB 53 (2025)

(02:38) RAISE Act (2025)

(03:05) US federal preemption

(03:41) EU AI Act

(04:22) Super PACs

(05:01) Policies companies support

(05:31) Misc

(05:34) Anthropic & Clark

(06:05) OpenAI & Lehane

The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:
September 29th, 2025

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/wmGRpmEJBAWBTGuSC/ai-companies-policy-advocacy-sep-2025

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“AI companies’ policy advocacy (Sep 2025)” by Zach Stein-Perlman

LessWrong (30+ Karma)