Barack Obama is pressing for tougher federal AI regulation while criticizing President Donald Trump’s strategy, but a Republican critic says Congress must write the rules.
During a Friday appearance at Colgate University in Hamilton, New York, Obama accused the Trump administration of resisting a serious response to artificial intelligence, Fox News Digital reported.
The dispute pits Obama’s demand for stronger federal controls against Trump’s push for American AI growth. Amy Kremer, an RNC member, says Congress should impose safeguards without handing more power to federal bureaucrats or Big Tech.
Obama argued that market pressure and possible lawsuits would not be enough to keep AI companies in check. “[The] government has to be regulating this!” he said.
The former president also said federal action could lag for “at least a couple of years” while the technology moves quickly. He blamed an administration he described as unwilling or unable to build a serious regulatory system.
Obama framed Trump as hostile to regulation. “The challenge we have is that, obviously, we have a president currently that has said that’s for losers,” he said at the university’s Family Weekend.
But the Trump administration has not treated AI policy as a matter for industry alone. The White House unveiled a national legislative framework in March that addressed child safety, free speech, workforce concerns and energy costs.
That plan also called for a consistent national approach to AI policy. The administration sought to encourage development while limiting rules it considered burdensome.
In June, Trump signed a national security directive ordering federal agencies to speed their adoption of advanced AI. The directive also called for controllable systems and clear lines of accountability in national security settings.
Those steps do not settle the debate over what federal AI law should contain. They do show that Obama’s claim rests on a disagreement over the scale and design of regulation, not a complete absence of federal action.
Trump moved again on Saturday by announcing an “AI Force” and plans for an AI czar. He also made his priority clear: “We will not in any way hinder or stifle the Growth of this incredible Industry.”
Kremer, who also chairs Humans First, agreed that AI poses risks. But she rejected the idea that the answer lies in giving Washington agencies broad new control or allowing technology companies to police themselves.
“You don't have to agree on politics to recognize reality: AI is moving incredibly fast, and policymakers need to understand both the opportunities and the very real risks that come with it,” Kremer said.
Her central answer was constitutional and practical. “It is not the president's job to create laws. That responsibility belongs to Congress, and Congress needs to act.”
That distinction matters. A president can direct executive agencies and propose a national policy. Congress must debate and pass the clear, enforceable laws that bind the country.
Kremer called for rules protecting children, workers, national security and local communities. She also argued that those protections should leave room for American companies to compete and keep China from winning the AI race.
Her warning applied to industry as well as government. “Voluntary commitments from the AI companies themselves are not sufficient,” she said. Companies developing powerful technology, she added, cannot make every decision about whether it is safe.
Kremer urged conservatives to create their own AI policy rather than leave the issue to Democrats. Her proposed approach would protect Americans, preserve innovation, respect state and local authority, and hold technology companies accountable.
That offers a firmer conservative answer than choosing between unchecked corporate power and unchecked federal power. Both can fail the public when rules lack clear limits and elected lawmakers avoid responsibility.
Obama, meanwhile, privately urged Democrats last week to make artificial intelligence a central political issue. His Colgate remarks brought that campaign into public view by tying AI regulation directly to criticism of Trump.
The concern is not confined to former Democratic officials. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei urged companies last week to slow improvements to leading AI models, while OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Elon Musk also voiced support for greater caution.
Those warnings show why Congress cannot treat AI as a distant problem. Yet concern from executives does not answer who creates the rules, how far those rules reach or which officials remain accountable when policy fails.
Obama’s comparison to airlines, drug companies and food companies rested on a simple claim: Financial liability after harm occurs cannot replace safety rules before harm occurs. He argued that lawsuits and market incentives alone would fall short.
Kremer did not dismiss that concern. She challenged Obama’s choice of target and warned against turning AI into another personal dispute between current and former presidents.
At the time of publication, the White House had not immediately answered Fox News Digital’s request for comment on Obama’s criticism.
The open questions now belong to Congress. Lawmakers must decide what protections are needed, which decisions remain with states and how to prevent powerful companies from writing rules that serve themselves.
Innovation needs room to grow, and power needs firm limits. Congress should set those limits openly, then answer to voters for the result.
