Brett Trout
The Chair of Iowa’s Committee on Economic Growth and Technology has just introduced a new Iowa House Study Bill 294 that, if passed, would require the disclosure of the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the preparation of election-related materials and would ostensibly prohibit the use of AI to discriminate against individuals.
Overview
Iowa House Study Bill 294 addresses the use and regulation of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly in election-related materials and protections against “algorithmic discrimination” in AI systems. The bill also outlines enforcement mechanisms and penalties.
Key Provisions
1. AI-Generated Election Materials (Division I)
- Any published AI-generated content advocating for/against candidates or ballot measures must contain a disclosure stating:
“This material was generated using artificial intelligence.” - The Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board is responsible for rule implementation.
- Willful violations of this requirement is classified as a serious misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail and fines ranging from $430 to $2,560.
2. Regulation of High-Risk AI (Division II)
Definitions
- Algorithmic Discrimination: Unfavorable treatment based on an individual or group of individuals’ actual or perceived age, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, or disability.
- Consequential decision: any decision that has a material legal or similarly significant effect on the provision or denial of a pardon, parole, probation, or release; an education enrollment or educational opportunity; employment; a financial or lending service; an essential government service; a health care service; insurance; or a legal service.
- High-Risk AI Systems: AI systems that significantly impact legal, financial, employment, education, healthcare, insurance, or government services.
- Developers: Entities creating or significantly modifying high-risk AI systems.
- Deployers: Entities using high-risk AI systems in Iowa.
For developers, the proposed bill:
- Requires reasonable care to protect individuals from known or reasonably foreseeable risks of AI discrimination.
- Creates a rebuttable presumption that a developer used reasonable care if the developer complies with the detailed requirements detailed in the bill and by the Attorney General.
- Requires providing AI discrimination risk documentation to a deployer or other developer using the AI and to publish a statement on their website detailing how the developer manages risks of AI discrimination
- Requires disclosure of risks of AI discrimination to the Attorney General
For deployers, the proposed bill:
- Requires the use of reasonable care to protect individuals from risks of AI discrimination.
- Requires completion of an AI impact assessment.
- Requires an annual review of the AI for discrimination.
- Requires disclosure that individuals are interacting with AI.
3. Enforcement & Penalties
- Iowa Attorney General has exclusive enforcement authority.
- Before taking legal action, the Attorney General must issue a notice of violation and allow 90 days for correction.
- Violations are considered unlawful practices under Iowa law and can result in civil penalties up to $40,000 per violation, injunction, disgorgement of money, etc.
- No private right of action is granted—only government enforcement is permitted.
4. Exemptions & Exclusions
- Complying with the law or legal system inquiry
- Acting under the authority of a federal agency
- Research and testing AI before deployment.
- AI used only for Cybersecurity, antivirus, or fraud detection technologies
- Developers do not have to disclose trade secrets.
Conclusion
While better election materials and preventing AI discrimination are laudable goals, the question remains whether this vague, yet complex regulatory framework is the proper vehicle to accomplish those goals. If this proposal simply burdens smaller cutting-edge tech companies with crippling regulations it may do more harm than good. Without evidence they will achieve their intended goals, these regulations will act as nothing more than another artificial barrier to entry, favoring establishment players over smaller, more nimble tech companies who simply do not have the excess capital to absorb a mountain of additional, potentially ineffective, bureaucratic red tape.
Recent Comments