Far from creating chaos, recent AI laws in states like California and New York are functioning as intended policy laboratories. By experimenting with concepts like independent testing and risk-based scoping, they are reducing uncertainty and creating a foundation for a more informed and effective federal AI framework.

The absence of a comprehensive federal AI law has spurred states like California and Colorado to experiment with unique regulatory approaches. This state-level action, while creating a "patchwork," allows for testing different governance models to see what works best before potential federal adoption.

With federal AI legislation stalled, states like Illinois, California, and New York are passing their own AI safety laws. Leading AI labs are endorsing these bills, recognizing that this state-level patchwork is effectively becoming the national standard for AI governance in the U.S.

The tech industry's shift from strong opposition to neutrality on California's AI bill was a strategic calculation. They preferred negotiating one workable law that could serve as a national model, viewing it as better than fighting 50 different, potentially worse, legislative battles across the country.

Despite the risk of a fragmented legal landscape, the slow pace of federal AI legislation makes state-level action essential. States are acting as "laboratories of democracy," pioneering regulatory approaches that can later inform a much-needed national framework.

By aligning its RAISE Act with California's SB 53, New York is helping create a powerful, bi-coastal regulatory consensus. This convergence counters the industry's argument against a "chaotic patchwork" of state laws and establishes a baseline for AI transparency that other states may adopt, effectively setting a national standard in the absence of federal action.

Without a federal framework, large blue states like California will create AI regulations. These rules, framed as prohibiting "algorithmic discrimination," will effectively force AI models to adopt DEI principles, leading to ideological capture that will affect the entire country. Federal preemption is argued as the only way to stop this.

In the absence of federal leadership, Governor Newsom's administration has pushed through legislation to regulate large language and frontier AI models, focusing on transparency and safety. This positions California, home to the AI industry, as the primary rule-maker for a technology its own founders call potentially dangerous.

Rather than setting a low standard, passing AI safety laws in states like California creates a strong baseline. This gives advocates leverage to demand an even stronger federal framework, as anything weaker would be a non-starter for stakeholders who oppose federal preemption.