Executing an Average Joe AI Agenda

From behind the closed doors of corporate board rooms to media-filled congressional hearings, the impact of artificial intelligence is being discussed, deliberated, and debated across the nation. As Big Tech executives invest billions (or more) into the promise of AI, policymakers in Washington are already raising caution flags and demanding regulation. The White House’s “Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights” reflects both the promise and apprehension of this technological phenomenon, painting AI both as a marvel and a potential threat to democracy and individual liberties. This debate is tantamount to sitting in a movie theater, not knowing if you will see a dystopian future movie or the feel-good film of the summer.

One shocking aspect of this debate is the reality that job displacement has been shockingly absent from the AI policy agenda. 

A few months after several officials explicitly or implicitly suggested that AI may end humanity, many of those same officials have since labeled “protecting and promoting innovation” as the “North Star” for dealing with AI. In this political disarray, America’s tinkerers, innovators, creators, and laborers writ large have been given insufficient attention.

Brian Merchant of Wired summarized one gaming companies’ response to recent advances in AI, writing, “Where executives saw reason for excitement, many game artists, writers, and designers saw a direct threat to their livelihoods.” Other gaming company leaders have responded in a similar fashion. 

What’s not to celebrate about tools that can develop more creative games at lower cost? Unsurprisingly, other gaming industry workers have similarly wondered if they would have a job for much longer. For many of them — more than 10,000 in 2023 — the answer was no. Many more will follow — in gaming, in journalism, in law.

Regardless of how the election turns out, the Average Joe AI Agenda deserves attention from the next Administration and Congress. 

So far, AI has delivered minimal to no benefits to the vast majority of us--those who don’t own Nvidia shares, who don’t work in Big Tech, and who don’t have the means nor the time to upskill at the same rate as advances in AI. 

A YouGov survey reported that fewer than half Americans use AI with any frequency. Fortune 500 companies, however, are all hooked on AI--using it for things like “operational efficiency,” “productivity enhancements,” and other buzzwords that poorly mask the effect on workers brought on by increased AI use.

While corporate use of AI should not necessarily be shamed, it should not be ignored. The productivity and creativity unleashed by AI can result in tremendous social good, especially if small businesses are able to access those AI tools. 

Thankfully, state lawmakers such as California State Senator Scott Wiener and federal officials, including FTC Chair Lina Khan, have recognized the need to make AI resources available to researchers and upstart companies. But the 10,000 displaced workers in the video game industry make clear that AI adoption may have very real, very significant negative impacts on laborers and, by extension, their families and their communities.

An Average Joe AI Agenda should focus on three things: first, shielding creators from exploitation; second, providing short-term assistance to individuals and communities affected by massive, rapid job displacement; and, third, developing new opportunities for people to meaningfully contribute to their communities through AI and other means. 

Voluntary efforts are already addressing the first prong. The Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA), for instance, is made up of AI leaders, such as Google and OpenAI, that have pledged to develop AI products in a way that helps content creators minimize manipulation and misidentification of their content. This is an important step in the right direction. The fact that publishers, including the BBC, have signed on to the C2PA indicates that the coalition’s principles and standards merit consideration by lawmakers as a meaningful way to assist publishers, artists, and the like.

The second prong requires updating and improving upon existing frameworks to aid those who suddenly find themselves looking for work. In the same way that the unemployment insurance system developed in response to new forms of economic uncertainty introduced by the Industrial Revolution, a new system of social support needs to develop to reflect the nature and severity of unanticipated economic effects of AI. One policy example to emulate may be emergency funds offered by universities to students experiencing hardships. Variants of universal basic income programs may also be worthy of study.

The third prong means fueling the American Dream by empowering individuals and small businesses to thrive in a new economic era. Passage of the CREATE AI Act would significantly further this aim. That Act would result in a National AI Research Resource that could democratize access to the critical and scarce resources to conduct leading AI research. Of course, most Americans wouldn’t directly benefit from the NAIRR. That’s why lawmakers should consider more direct approaches to help Americans realize their goals and act on their skills. Some sort of national service program, a modern Civilian Conservation Corps, deserves close scrutiny.

Both candidates for President have yet to embrace an Average Joe AI Agenda but doing so would align with much of their messaging. Vice President Kamala Harris, for one, has expressed a desire to be a “people-first” president. Former President Donald Trump, likewise, has indicated his support for the common man. Both should act on these vague goals with specific Average Joe AI Agendas.

Technological progress has too frequently entrenched and expanded the well-being of the elite, while only indirectly and unpredictably aiding the majority of Americans. We’re early enough in the AI era to make this wave one that really does lift all boats rather than helping the few upgrade their yachts. 

Kevin T. Frazier is an Assistant Professor of Law at St. Thomas University Benjamin L. Crump College of Law as an Assistant Professor of Law in 2023. Prior to joining STU Law, Professor Frazier served as a Judicial Clerk to Chief Justice Mike McGrath of the Montana Supreme Court and conducted research on regulating AI as a Research Fellow with the Legal Priorities Project. Professor Frazier’s research explores the intersection of emerging technology, democratic design, and the law.