Menu
SUBSCRIBE
SUBSCRIBE
Menu

bipartisan AI policy

Exterior view of the U.S. Capitol dome under blue sky, for coverage of the House advancing the CREATE AI Act.

House Advances Revised CREATE AI Act as Bipartisan Senate Companion Gains Momentum

, , , , , , , , ,

The updated legislation expands on last year’s proposal by adding governance, security, and operational provisions to establish a permanent National Artificial Intelligence Research Resource.

House lawmakers are advancing a substantially revised version of the Creating Resources for Every American To Experiment with Artificial Intelligence (CREATE AI) Act, that expands access beyond the original bill to give advanced AI infrastructure for researchers, educators, startups, and government organizations. According to the bill, the program’s purposes include advancing AI research, developing AI skills across the U.S. workforce, and expanding the nation’s AI research capacity.

Compared with the version introduced in 2025, the revised House bill provides a more detailed blueprint for how the National Artificial Intelligence Research Resource (NAIRR) would operate. The NAIRR would give eligible researchers, educators, startups, and government organizations access to shared AI computing and other research resources through a federally coordinated program. Rather than simply authorizing the program, the legislation establishes a governance structure under the National Science Foundation (NSF) and provides for an organization to manage its day-to-day operations. It also spells out how the program would be administered, including oversight, user access, and reporting requirements.

The revised legislation expands the types of resources available through NAIRR giving eligible users access to a broader range of AI resources, including models, data, software, educational tools, and other assets contributed by public and private partners.

The bill also adds several policy and security provisions. It establishes eligibility requirements for organizations seeking access, generally limiting participation to U.S.-based institutions while excluding entities operating in foreign countries of concern. It also requires reviews to help ensure resources meet standards for security, privacy, safety, and the protection of individual rights before they are made available.

If enacted, the legislation would authorize the NSF to establish NAIRR following a successful pilot program and coordinate contributions from federal agencies and nongovernmental organizations into a shared national resource.

The revamped House bill follows the introduction of the bipartisan CREATE AI Act (S. 4441) in the Senate in late April by Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.), Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

Orange and dark blue squares in a geometric grid on a dark background, illustrating voter support for AI safety rules.

Voters Back Mandatory AI Safety Rules Across Party Lines

, , , , , , , ,

The AI Policy Institute survey found that 78% prefer mandatory safety and security standards to no regulation, with similar support among Democrats and Republicans.

Key Takeaways

  • 78% of likely voters chose mandatory safety and security standards over no regulations at all.
  • Democrats and Republicans were only a few points apart on core AI safety principles, including mandatory standards and human control requirements.
  • 65% prefer required government review of frontier AI models over voluntary review.
  • 86% said the most powerful AI systems should have a guaranteed “kill” switch.
  • Only 16% supported fully blocking states’ ability to regulate AI.

The AI Policy Institute (AIPI) released a national survey showing broad voter support for mandatory safety rules for advanced AI.

The survey asked 1,007 U.S. likely voters to choose among competing approaches to oversight of advanced AI systems. The report shows strong bipartisan support for regulating AI development rather than halting it.

 

Voters want AI regulation

The survey gave voters a choice between two approaches. One would require AI companies to add safeguards to their most advanced models. The other would leave the AI industry largely unregulated and hold users responsible for illegal use.

Voters chose mandatory safety and security standards over no regulation by a margin of 78% to 8%, with 14% unsure.

Further, voters chose required government review of the most capable AI models over voluntary review, 65% to 22%. They also chose government-led safety standards over company-led standards, 62% to 24%.

 

Regulation not cancellation

The report also found that voters favored mandatory standards over an outright ban on more powerful AI systems, 66% to 21%. 

 

Parties agree on AI safety

The survey found broad agreement between Democrats and Republicans on the basic case for AI safety rules.

Both parties backed the same direction: required safeguards, human control, and government oversight.

AI Risk Today ai safety party agreement 2026

Democratic and Republican support for core AI safety principles in the AI Policy Institute survey. (Image credit: AI Risk Today)

Control draws the broadest support

AIPI found that 86% of likely voters agreed that the most powerful AI systems should have a guaranteed way to shut them down; i.e., a “kill” switch. Support was 88% among Democrats, 86% among independents, and 83% among Republicans.

The report also found that 84% said Congress should make sure the most powerful AI models remain under human control. Further, 82% agreed that companies should not build AI to be smarter than humans until they can demonstrate control over such systems.

 

Voters want a regulatory backstop, less concerned if states regulate

Half of voters said states should be allowed to regulate AI until Congress passes federal rules. 20% said states should be allowed to set their own rules indefinitely, and only 16% said states should be barred from regulating AI entirely.