Consumer privacy and data control are far from the only tech issues legislators are confronting this session. Lawmakers from both parties are addressing artificial intelligence (AI), with legislation building on recent findings that the state has fallen behind federal and local counterparts in this area.
Techwire Takeaways
• Three pieces of proposed state legislation would create a commission on AI in government services; set guidelines and accountability for state agencies in taking up AI tools; and require strategic AI planning.
• All are in early stages.
In the state Little Hoover Commission’s November report Artificial Intelligence: A Roadmap for California, Chairman Pedro Nava said 2019 will test the state on everything from wildfires to homelessness to health-care costs — and AI. State government, Nava said, “has yet to accept the AI challenge and truly begin the race.”
“While some departments are collaborating with the private sector and academia to develop and use new technologies, the overwhelming majority are not preparing or strategizing for an AI world,” he added. These pieces of proposed legislation could help state departments change that:
• Assembly Bill 976 would create the Artificial Intelligence in State Government Services Commission and empower it to “gather input on how artificial intelligence and data science could be used to improve state services”; make plans for soliciting AI and data science-related demonstration projects in areas of “critical state services”; and incorporate successes into those services. Commission recommendations would be due by Nov. 1, 2020.
Four of its eight members would be appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom; and include at least one representative from organized labor and one from the private sector. One member each would be appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules, and by the Assembly Speaker, with the state directors of Technology and Finance rounding out the group.
It was authored by Assemblyman Ed Chau, D-Monterey Park, an author of last year’s California Consumer Privacy Act. But it attracted interest from Assemblyman Kevin Kiley, R-Granite Bay and Assemblyman Jay Obernolte, R-Hesperia, both of whom joined their fellow California Legislative Technology and Innovation Caucus member in introducing it. AB 976 has had its first reading and was referred to commission earlier this month.
“Establishing a commission to review how California may harness the power of AI, to improve state services, will serve to benefit our economy, public health and safety, jobs, and the environment, as this rapidly growing technology reshapes our society,” Chau said in a statement. The bill is among his 2019 legislative priorities.
Matthew Easley, Kiley’s legislative director, said AB 976 sets the stage for Kiley’s own AB 459, and would give its members, “some authority for identifying and implementing demonstration projects for the state to take up and utilize.”
• AB 459 would create guidelines and accountability measures to assist state departments in implementing AI tools, Easley said, enabling, for example, the ability for human intervention and appeals of decisions by AI tools; and human understanding of the process. It would help ensure tools and systems are built in an unbiased manner, prioritized in terms of safety and security; and that reliability and any misuse are monitored.
“Those ensure that we’re going to have a high level of accountability, because we’re a public entity and it’s the government’s job and responsibility to be transparent and accountable to the people,” Easley said.
• Senate Bill 348, from state Sen. Ling Ling Chang, R-Diamond Bar, would require the secretaries of certain state agencies to create a strategic plan around using AI to enhance state services. It would also encourage Newsom to appoint a special AI adviser to create a statewide strategic plan for using AI to improve state service. The bill also would encourage the offices of the state controller, treasurer; the secretary of state, the University of California and the Cal State University systems to designate chief artificial intelligence officers. Both AB 459 and SB 348 are in print and have been referred to committee.
“I really think that our three offices — the offices of Sen. Chang and Assembly member Kiley and Assembly member Chau — can hopefully really work well together and these bills can nest nicely within one another, and address different but equally important policy choices for the state,” Easley said.
