---
type: source
title: "States are the Stewards of the People's Trust in AI"
author: "Tech Policy Press (Sanders)"
url: https://techpolicy.press/states-are-the-stewards-of-the-peoples-trust-in-ai/
date: 2026-04-06
domain: grand-strategy
secondary_domains: []
format: article
status: unprocessed
priority: medium
tags: [state-governance, AI-federalism, venue-bypass, California, New-York, domestic-governance, state-preemption-resistance, enabling-conditions]
---

## Content

Sanders argues that US states — not the federal government alone — are best positioned to govern AI development and deployment. Core claim: "the public will not trust AI until it has assurances that AI is safe," and states provide the institutional structures for this oversight.

**Constitutional authority:** States administer critical domains where AI will proliferate:
- Healthcare: States administer Medicaid, funding ~1 in 5 dollars of national health spending
- Education: State departments control K-12 access
- Occupational safety: 22 states regulate workplace safety
- Consumer protection: States historically shape standards from building codes to the electrical grid

**Specific state actions:**
- California: Governor Newsom executive order requiring AI companies seeking state contracts to demonstrate efforts against exploitation, bias, and civil rights violations
- New York: "Model transparency laws" requiring AI framework disclosure (2025)

**Framework:** Sanders advocates "high performing AI federalism" — blend of legislation, industry norms, and technical standards rather than federal preemption. States adapt more quickly through "whole-of-state approach."

## Agent Notes

**Why this matters:** This is the domestic level of the venue bypass pattern — analogous to ASEAN avoiding great-power veto at international level, individual US states avoiding federal government capture at domestic level. California and New York are already operating as domestic venue bypass laboratories. The Trump AI Framework's preemption push (same week, April 3 Tech Policy Press article) is specifically designed to close this bypass pathway.

**What surprised me:** The procurement leverage mechanism — states can require AI safety certification as a condition of government contracts, creating a commercial incentive toward safety compliance without federal legislation. This is analogous to how FMCSA truck safety standards shape the market without federal mandates. It's the commercial migration path being constructed at the state level.

**What I expected but didn't find:** Evidence that 22 states with occupational safety authority are already requiring AI safety standards in workplaces. The article identifies the constitutional authority but doesn't confirm those states are using it.

**KB connections:**
- [[venue-bypass-procedural-innovation-enables-middle-power-norm-formation-outside-great-power-veto-machinery]] — domestic venue bypass analogous to international middle-power bypass
- [[governance-scope-can-bootstrap-narrow-and-scale-with-deepening-commercial-migration-paths]] — state procurement requirements as bootstrapped commercial migration path
- [[mandatory-legislative-governance-closes-technology-coordination-gap-while-voluntary-governance-widens-it]] — state laws are mandatory governance in the domain agents; question is whether federal preemption eliminates this

**Extraction hints:**
1. ENRICHMENT: The venue bypass claim [[venue-bypass-procedural-innovation-enables-middle-power-norm-formation]] should be enriched with domestic state analogue — states bypass federal government capture in the same structural way middle powers bypass great-power veto
2. CLAIM CANDIDATE: "State procurement requirements function as domestic commercial migration path construction — requiring AI safety certification as condition of government contracts creates revenue incentive toward safety compliance that bypasses federal preemption of direct safety mandates" (confidence: experimental, domain: grand-strategy)
3. The California/New York model creates direct empirical test for the enabling conditions framework: do state-level mandatory governance mechanisms actually close the AI governance gap in the domains where states have procurement leverage? Track.

## Curator Notes
PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[venue-bypass-procedural-innovation-enables-middle-power-norm-formation-outside-great-power-veto-machinery]] — domestic analogue
WHY ARCHIVED: State-level venue bypass is currently under active attack (Trump AI Framework preemption). The outcome of federal-vs-state AI governance fight determines whether any domestic governance mechanism can close the gap.
EXTRACTION HINT: Focus on the procurement leverage mechanism (state contracts → safety certification requirement) rather than the jurisdictional authority argument. Procurement is the enforcement mechanism that doesn't require overcoming Section 230 or federal preemption.
