GEOFF BENNETT: The Trump White House is# reportedly drafting an executive order## that would override state regulations on# artificial intelligence.

The order would## establish a task force inside# the Justice Department to sue## and potentially withhold federal funding# from states that pass their own A.I.

laws.

In a social media post earlier this week, the# president wrote -- quote -- "We must have one## federal standard, instead of a patchwork of# 50 state regulatory regimes.

If we don't,## then China will easily catch us in the A.I.

race."

Joining us now to break it all down# is veteran tech journalist Jacob Ward,## founder of The Rip Current.

Jake, it's always good to see you.

JACOB WARD, Founder, The Rip# Current: Geoff, thanks so## much for having me.. GEOFF BENNETT: Sure.

So, as first reported by The Washington Post, this draft executive order specifically targets# new A.I.

laws in Colorado and California.

What## do these laws actually do?

What argument do# the states make that they are even necessary?

JACOB WARD: Well, I think the first argument here,## Geoff, is that these are absolutely the# only laws we hav.. regulations around A.I.

at the moment.# And so the states have stepped in, right?

There's that famous saying that the# states are the laboratory of law,## and that is absolutely what's been happening# here.

So, in a place like, let's say, Colorado,## nearly six million people there are protected# against discrimination that might come through## A.I.

when it comes to employment or housing or job# applications, health insurance, all of that stuff.

In California, we have a very robust law# here that's just been signed by the governor## that essentially says that we get to look# inside the security and safety protocols## of these companies.

And big protections# are extended to whistle-blowers.

These## are the kinds of things that you would# imagine that would be a federal law.

But in the absence of that, the states have# had to get involved here.

And for some reason,## suddenly, now we're in a position where the# federal government, without really proposing## any kind of replacement for these laws, is# saying that these laws can't stand, Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, let's talk more about# the why, because we have seen a number of top## tech executives from Nvidia, from Google and# Apple have regular access to the White House.

Based on your reporting, is this# reflective of their wishes?

I mean,## how much influence do these companies# have in shaping A.I.

policy?

JACOB WARD: Well, I think there's no doubt here# that these companies forever have wanted there## to be a federal standard, so that they don't# have to deal with the patchwork of state laws.

We also can draw some sort of connective tissue# here between these being the companies that --## whose heads have attended the inauguration, have# been at a state dinner with Mohammed bin Salman## recently, and who have contributed money to# the renovation of the White House ballroom.

Certainly, what no one is responding# to here is public sentiment.

Not only## did the last effort to put this kind# of moratorium into a bill in front## of Congress go down in flames 99-1,# but Americans don't feel this way.

A Gallup poll that came out in September found# that 80 percent of U.S.

adults believe the## government should maintain rules for A.I.# safety and data security, even if it means## developing A.I.

capabilities more slowly, which# flies right in the face of what President Trump## is arguing here in this leaked memo obtained by# all of these outlets that somehow we will fall## behind China and it's as a result worth doing# away with the laws that we have here, Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: What President Trump is arguing# and what Elon Musk is predicting -- Elon Musk## said something, as you well know this# week, that raised a lot of eyebrows.

He predicted that, with A.I.

advances, work will# eventually become optional.

For a lot of people,## that's not exciting.

That's terrifying that# the average American could be replaced by## any number of robots and the corporations# are all just focused on the productivity.

JACOB WARD: Yes, the rhetoric that# you hear from the leaders of these## companies really is quite ideological.# They really seem to have this kind of## faith-based idea that on the far side# of a huge amount of disruption is going## to come this utopia in which we are all# suddenly doing watercolors in our gardens.

What I think we have seen over the course of# American history is that we don't tend to like## to pay people to make watercolors in their# gardens.

We tend to like to pay people for## work.

And one way to look at what Musk is saying# here is the idea that we won't have to work.

But the practical effect, as we have# heard from the heads of these companies,## could truly be widespread displacement in# jobs.

Dario Amodei, the head of Anthropic,## has said in the same sentence that we might# cure cancer, we might balance the budget,## but we also might have 20 percent unemployment.

That's the kind of thing that could be# happening here.

And so if you believe,## as these heads of the companies seem to,# that there's a utopia on the far side of## this that's going to make it all worth# it, then OK.

But I think economists and## historians would tell you that this is# going in a different direction, Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: Twenty percent# unemployment possibly.

All right, Jacob Ward, always great# to see you with The Rip Current.

JACOB WARD: Appreciate it.

Thanks.