CDT and Consumer Reports Speak out for Colorado’s AI Bias Bill
Today the Center for Democracy & Technology and Consumer Reports published a statement welcoming the passage of Colorado’s Senate Bill 205, a bill that would establish basic safeguards for the use of AI in high-stakes decisions affecting consumers and workers, such as decisions about access to housing, lending, and employment.
SB 205 would require companies to assess high-risk AI tools for the risk of discrimination, and would give consumers and workers the right to know when and how AI is being used to make consequential decisions about them.
“This bill lays an important foundation for Colorado to build on. Right now, consumers have no idea when potentially biased or error-prone AI software is used in decisions about whether they get insurance, medical treatment, or screened out of a job. This legislation would shine some much-needed sunlight on high-risk artificial intelligence. There’s still work to do to ensure strong enforcement and to close some remaining loopholes. We look forward to Governor Polis signing SB 205, and working with the Governor and Colorado legislators in the future,” said Grace Gedye, policy analyst with Consumer Reports.
“Workers’ rights and consumer advocates have long called for legislation that would bring transparency and accountability to the shadowy world of AI-driven decisions,” said Matt Scherer, Senior Policy Counsel at the Center for Democracy & Technology. “Majority Leader Rodriguez and Representatives Rutinel and Titone took stakeholder input seriously before bringing SB 205 to the floor, and the bill on Governor Polis’s desk reflects their thoughtfulness and diligence. We look forward to the Governor signing this much-needed baseline legislation and working with civil society and other stakeholders to make sure that SB 205’s impact matches its spirit.”
Consumer Reports recently published an AI policy guide that outlines its key positions and recommendations for policymakers.
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.
