State Leadership in Public Sector AI Governance: A Breakdown of Key Officials & Their Responsibilities
Graphic for an infographic from CDT’s Equity in Civic Technology team, entitled “State Leadership in Public Sector AI Governance: A Breakdown of Key Officials & Their Responsibilities.” Brightly colored icons, front left to right: a government building; an executive chair; a draft state bill; a gavel.
Many states have already acknowledged the importance of an interdisciplinary, inter-agency approach to public sector AI governance with the creation of statewide task forces and commissions to develop policies and oversee the use of AI in state government. State policymakers and administrators across government have unique and critical roles to play in managing the development, acquisition, use, and ongoing monitoring of AI in public service delivery.
Specifically, three categories of state leaders play important roles in governing responsible public sector AI use:
Policymakers, like governors, state legislators, attorneys general, and agency executives, develop and set AI priorities, such as statewide policy objectives, resource allocation, talent strategies, and guardrails for responsible use.
Cross-government administrators, including Chief Information Officers, Chief Procurement Officers, and Chief Auditors, oversee AI use in state agencies and support statewide implementation of AI priorities set by state policymakers.
Agency officers and staff, such as Program Directors, Civil Rights Officers, and General Counsel, implement AI systems into agency operations and operationalize AI-related priorities set by state policymakers.
Although a more diverse range of officials are becoming involved in decision-making and oversight of public sector AI, too often decision-making remains limited to technology-focused offices or positions. To better understand how policymakers across all parts of state government should play a role in public sector AI governance, the following infographics map the roles and responsibilities that state officials should have in these critical decisions. Some states are more centralized in their operations than others, so the listed roles and responsibilities in these infographics may vary by state depending on their technology governance structures.
Coalition Urges Senate Not to Let Companies Waive Financial Regulations for AI
CDT joined AI Now Institute, American Civil Liberties Union, and several organizations dedicated to tech policy, consumer protection, and civil rights in a letter to Senate leadership and the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee opposing the “AI Innovation Labs” language in Sec. 10509 of the CLARITY Act.
As concern about risks and harms related to AI systems continue to grow, a growing chorus of policymakers, industry leaders, and advocates have called for independent AI assessments. This explainer provides an overview of recent proposals for third-party assessment in the United States, including state and federal legislation, executive actions, and industry proposals.
Having third parties assess AI systems might seem like common sense, but crafting effective policies toward this goal can be devilishly tricky. A poorly-constructed ecosystem for third-party assessment could easily fail to consider the most consequential mechanisms of risk, neglect the AI harms that most impact people, or do more to protect AI companies than people.
Not All Guardrails Are Created Equal: Comparing Content Safety and Copyright Filtering
As courts and policymakers work through questions about chatbot liability, they should be wary of analogies that flatten meaningful technical differences. Copyright filtering and safety intervention share real challenges around ambiguity and evasion, but they diverge in what each control must assess, how each manifests over the course of a conversation, and how much can be verified from the outside.
