In February of this year, the leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives announced a task force to investigate concerns surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI), chaired by Republican Jay Obernolte and Democrat Ted Lieu, according to reporting by Reuters. Observers of American politics might dismiss this effort as a halfhearted, election-year attempt at moving the needle on bipartisan legislation to address Americans’ concerns. History teaches us, however, that legislative committees—if their power is wielded strategically—can shape the national dialogue and elevate the profile of ambitious leaders.
In early 1941, few held Senator Harry S. Truman of Missouri in high esteem; his critics termed him “the Senator from Pendergast,” a reference to the Democratic Party boss of Kansas City, Tom Pendergast, who played a key role in his election. Indeed, Truman’s career in the Senate, beginning in 1935, was not particularly distinguished. That was until a speech on the Senate floor dramatically changed his fortunes. As Europe fell under German domination, Congress responded to the Roosevelt Administration’s calls for defense preparations. Senator Truman’s February 1941 address to the chamber warned Congress of the perils of cronyism in the distribution of defense contracts. Just a few weeks later, the Senate motioned to create the Senate Special Committee to Investigate the National Defense Program, more commonly known as the Truman Committee, appointing Truman as chairman. Truman wielded the chairmanship effectively; his radio addresses to the nation about the ills of war profiteering and the thorough reports his committee issued prompted substantial changes to defense procurement policies. The military was ultimately better positioned for mobilization, as the quality standards of military essentials ranging from troop barracks to aircraft engines soared. Truman became a household name, landing on the 1944 Democratic ticket as Roosevelt’s running mate.
Readers today may find the comparison of Artificial Intelligence to war mobilization fantastical. But the domestic consequences of both are closer than they may appear. War mobilization bolstered big manufacturing, the engine of America’s post-war growth; Artificial Intelligence fuels technology giants’ continued rise, the engines of contemporary American economic pre-eminence. War mobilization enabled America to explore far-reaching social changes, such as racial integration and a greater role for women in the public sphere; Artificial Intelligence may exacerbate social issues through sophisticated disinformation campaigns while simultaneously ameliorating them by empowering marginalized communities. War mobilization jolted Congress out of its isolationist stupor; Artificial Intelligence draws such enthusiasm and trepidation that Congressional action is inevitable. Much of what “Co-Intelligence”—a term coined by Professor Ethan Mollick of Wharton referring to AI-enhanced human existence—will look like will be decided by Congress. Much of the Tug-of-War that is legislating will occur in committees with dull names. Much of what eventually surfaces from hours of subcommittee testimony, thousands of pages of bureaucratic language, and hundreds of small political compromises will be the product of a few ambitious men and women. Keen observers of the AI revolution have not without reason focused principally on the private sector; however, they would be making a grave mistake to lose sight of Congress.