SAN JOSE’S FORMER MAYOR turned congressman finds himself at the center of a national battle over who can regulate artificial intelligence: the states or the federal government under President Donald Trump.
A coalition of online child safety and tech watchdog groups is calling on Rep. Sam Liccardo, along with several other lawmakers, to reject an endorsement by a pro-AI super PAC called Leading the Future, which has connections to the Trump administration and companies that work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The PAC launched last year to advance the AI industry’s agenda — to take away states’ regulatory power and leave it to the federal government — with more than $100 million in contributions from OpenAI President Greg Brockman, tech venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale.
The PAC has endorsed Republican and Democratic lawmakers, including Liccardo. But Liccardo is the only lawmaker of the select pool who embodies Silicon Valley’s often contradictory relationship with Washington, D.C.
“Silicon Valley has always been the land of first adopters when it comes to tech,” Tracy Rosenberg, executive director of surveillance watchdog group Oakland Privacy, told San José Spotlight. “In my view Sam Liccardo has had a front row seat to the ways in which tech can be disruptive and harmful, if not properly regulated, so I would suggest he think about this (endorsement) a little more deeply.”
Representatives for the Leading the Future PAC didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Rosenberg’s group is among the signatories of the coalition’s letter to Liccardo, which also include the Tech Oversight Project and Common Cause. The letter questions what Leading the Future’s endorsement says about Licardo’s views on taking regulatory power away from states such as Colorado, which in 2024 passed a first of its kind law calling for guardrails from bias, discrimination and unethical decision-making by companies using AI.
Supporting ‘sensible’ regulation
Liccardo didn’t respond when asked if he would reject Leading the Future’s endorsement. A spokesperson for his office said they don’t expect Liccardo to receive any money from the PAC but that the lawmaker supports AI’s preemption from state regulation within reason.
“Sam believes that we need a sensible federal regulatory framework to provide transparency, child safety and agentic risk management as a precondition to federal preemption, and considers such an approach superior to the current patchwork of 50 conflicting and disjointed state regulatory schemes,” the spokesperson told San José Spotlight.
Campaign finance records indicate neither Liccardo nor an independent PAC supporting him, the Liccardo Victory Fund, have taken money from Leading the Future. In recent days, the organization claimed to have raised a total of $140 million.
As a federal representative of Santa Clara County, a longtime liberal stronghold, Liccardo has positioned himself as an adversary to Trump. He has criticized the president over the Pentagon’s dispute with Anthropic over the use of its AI technology, as well as last year’s crusade to cut government waste under the Department of Government Efficiency, known as DOGE.
“In my view Sam Liccardo has had a front row seat to the ways in which tech can be disruptive and harmful, if not properly regulated, so I would suggest he think about this (endorsement) a little more deeply.”
Tracy Rosenberg, Oakland Privacy
But Liccardo’s district also spans the world’s wealthiest ZIP codes and most powerful tech moguls — and he’s called for a middle-of-the-road embrace of new technologies such as AI. Last year, he spearheaded a congressional innovation agenda on AI, online privacy and responsible governance.
In recent months, Liccardo has voiced anxiety about frontier AI models advancing at a pace faster than Congress can regulate them. In March, he announced he was exploring legislation to take regulating AI out of the hands of Congress and into an appointed, bipartisan oversight body that would set safety standards for the technology. If companies met those standards, they would earn exemption — or preemption — from more restrictive state laws.
It’s somewhat in line with an executive order Trump signed in December, which called for AI preemption and bemoaned certain states’ AI regulatory laws as impeding innovation and economic prosperity. While Liccardo has framed his proposal as an alternative to Trump’s efforts, the coalition isn’t onboard either way.
“Efforts to preempt state laws would strip away safeguards for children, creators, and consumers — concentrating regulatory authority in Trump’s hands while leaving the public with few protections,” the watchdog coalition’s letter to Liccardo and other lawmakers reads.
Who deregulation favors
Rosenberg said AI preemption is deregulation that favors the AI industry’s monied interests.
“We have seen the influence of tech funding and tech influence working in the Trump administration in very specific ways, which are not just about consistency in AI — but largely about deregulation, no regulation or the most minimal regulation possible,” Rosenberg told San Jose Spotlight. “When we look at these real life harms already happening to some degree right now, we should not be advocating for the most relaxed possible federal standard.”
Those concerns stem from several high-profile controversies across the U.S. A federal judge in Minnesota in March ordered UnitedHealth Group to hand over documents in a lawsuit accusing the insurance company of using AI to improperly deny its members care. There was also anecdotal reporting last year on the role of AI chatbots in teenage deaths by suicide.
Congressman Ro Khanna — who has clashed with Silicon Valley tech moguls over his support for a proposed California billionaire tax — has not received Leading the Future’s endorsement. But he also spoke in defense of Liccardo.
“Sam is principled, independent, thoughtful and has led on AI safety,” Khanna told San José Spotlight. “The broader problem is money in politics. I don’t take a dime of PAC money and I’m leading a bill with Rep. Summer Lee to ban super PACs. Americans on the left and right are sick of special interests controlling our politics. We need to get PAC money out — whether that’s tech, big pharma or anything else.”
Contact Brandon Pho at brandon@sanjosespotlight.com or @brandonphooo on X.
This story originally appeared in San Jose Spotlight.