Protesters bring petition to Trahan’s office to oppose Frontier Act section
Protesters in Lowell, Massachusetts, delivered a petition to U.S. Rep. Lori Trahan's office, opposing a section of her proposed federal Frontier Act. They argue the bill's 'preemption' clause could prevent states and municipalities from enacting their own AI regulations, including those affecting data center siting. Trahan's office disputes this interpretation, stating the bill preserves broad state authority while establishing federal standards for powerful AI models.
UMass Lowell College Democrats President Matthew Kelly led a small group of protesters to U.S. Rep. Lori Trahan's office in Lowell, Massachusetts, to voice opposition to a section of the proposed federal Frontier Act. Trahan, a Democrat, introduced the bill with bipartisan support, aiming to create a risk-based framework for regulating the rapidly growing artificial intelligence industry.
The core of the protesters' concern is a section they term "preemption," which they interpret as prohibiting states and municipalities from creating their own AI regulations beyond federal mandates. They delivered a petition with over 4,000 signatures. Kelly, along with Lowell City Councilor Sean McDonough and local data center critic Jake Fortes, argued that such a clause would be a "sellout" to large AI firms and would impede local control over issues like data center siting, referencing past concerns with the Markley Group in Lowell.
Trahan's office, however, denied this interpretation. A spokesperson stated that claims of the bill banning state AI laws are "flat out wrong" and a "misunderstanding." Trahan clarified that the Frontier Act creates a narrow federal lane for powerful AI models, focusing on mandatory incident reporting, independent verification, and emergency backstops, while expressly preserving state authority for broader issues like consumer protection, civil rights, privacy, and child protection.
The Alliance for Secure AI, which helped refine the bill, echoed Trahan's position, asserting the bill only preempts states from narrow categories of new regulations. The debate highlights the tension between federal AI regulation and the desire for local control over technologies and their infrastructure, like data centers.