that with something that would be more focused on encouraging more development of artificial intelligence and encouraging that specifically in the space of the military faced on documents that we've seen at the washington post. i think it is definitely safe to say that a trump administration has signaled a lighter touch approach to technology. also, the general rhetoric we've heard from the trump administration, both in the past and now on the campaign trail around social media, is very much critical of requiring the companies to do any content moderation to address ai and other types of disinformation. it's likely that you would in fact see a trump administration pressure the companies to be more hands-off on that front and follow the path that we've seen from platforms like elon musk's x. host: cat, president biden

signed the executive order about a year ago. remind us what some of those provisions are. guest: the executive order effectively established a regime where the most powerful ai systems have to go through special transparency provisions and testing with the federal government. this is a process that is being led through the ai safety institute, which was also established with the ai executive order. the ai executive order also included a lot of provisions around how the federal government buys technology. using the purchasing power of the federal government to force companies to raise their standards across the board. the executive order also takes aim at concerns that ai can exacerbate bias and discrimination online. host: miami, florida on the line for republicans. good morning, alan. caller: i am calling because

there is something to the general subject matter of artificial intelligence. i've got something to say about it as a software engineer that i am. i have been on this for a long time, starting with the computerization with the elections, the 2001 mess. being a software engineer, i know the types of problems you can have. i am against computerizing any elections, for example. with artificial intelligence, there is too much government involved in everything. every time something moves, somebody in government wants to control it, tax it, take it over, use it to change minds and hearts. everything the government touches turns to dust.

so, i just wanted to put those two cents in as someone who knows a bit about tech. i am immersed in it. all of the streaming services, the kinds of services that i use for technical reasons, you know? for technology when i do my job. host: your response? guest: thank you for raising that. i think that it points to a broader debate that's happening now. how much regulation of artificial intelligence should we have in the united states? we have seen the european union move ahead with quite aggressive ai regulation through the eu ai act. that has created concern in the u.s. that this technology will be different than others that came before it. the internet in its early days wasn't heavily regulated and a

lot of people think that's why it spurred so many new innovations. there's also the broader conversation now happening about the downsides of technology. about the harm on children. about the issues that they bring up for elections, like we are talking about today. i think there is a tension of how you ensure that those innovations can keep happening while also protecting consumers. host: the federal communications commission is weighing a proposed rule around ai. what does that look like? what has the ftc commissioner said? guest: the ftc has been pretty active in terms of responding to some of the robo call issues. they were among those that fined the man in new hampshire who shared the biden robo calls earlier this year. they have been very aggressive in terms of putting a stake in the ground on addressing the

deception issues that come up with ai. this is a continuation of the work that we've seen the agency due on robo calls over the past years. this work has received some pushback from republicans who are concerned about the implications for free speech and political speech and have questioned whether it is proper for the fcc to play this role. host: florida on the line for independents, good morning, stan. caller: i want be voting for rick scott, either. elon musk is giving donald trump all this money to send out ads. they are sending out ads in all of these states telling them not to vote for kamala harris because she is a jew hater. i have seen biden in the back of the car driving down the street. trumbull do anything to win.

millions of dollars to muska sending out harris stuff to people in michigan, all of this stuff. musk is the biggest liar ever. his campaign is given billions of dollars. i seen biden in the back of the truck. i've seen all kinds of stuff. the stuff is crazy. it is all the money he is giving him because he doesn't have no money for his ground game. he is sending out fake letter, kamala harris sticking her hand and an electric thing on television and is going to take away all of this stuff. the stuff is baloney. host: any response to the caller? guest: we are seeing elon musk play an unusual role in this election cycle. he has given more money than he ever has in the past to support truck's election -- support trump's election. it is a time when he is the owner of twitter when it raises questions about what does it mean to have someone who is so

politically active in support of one candidate to have ownership and control over a key social network where information about the race is spreading? host: we're talking with the washington post's cat zakrzewski about the use of artificial intelligence in campaign 2024. if you have a question or comment you can give us a call. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. cat, you talked about it a little bit. you touched on where former president donald trump stands, potentially, on artificial intelligence when it comes to regulation. what do we know about vice president kamala harris? guest: we know that she was the face of the biden administration's efforts on this front. we were talking a little before about the ai executive order almost exactly a year ago.

when that was signed, kamala harris traveled to london to be the face of that order on the international stage. last year about this time there was an international convening of leaders from the united states, china, the u.k. and the birthplace of computing. harris traveled there to talk about artificial intelligence. in her remarks she often tries to strike a balance. she is someone who is from california, has a lot of close ties with the tech industry, and so she always promotes the innovation that could come from the technology. but at the same time, she really frames it as a consumer protection issue and civil rights issue. we hear her talk about the potential for ai to be abused for discrimination and bias in hiring and other areas like housing. that is what we've heard from her on this front. host: vice president kamala

harris has ties because of california and her work in the state previously. so does vice presidential candidate jd vance. what would he bring to the table in terms of regulation of artificial intelligence? guest: jd vance was a venture capitalist himself for a while. he actually lived in san francisco and worked on investing in companies in biotech and other consumer areas. he is very connected with the executives and investors who are fueling the latest wave of ai development. he certainly brings the personal connections and understanding of the technology. we've seen the reverse from jd vance talking about concerns that there will be what he calls woke gpt, issues where

companies go too far in trying to address the discrimination and bias of these technologies. we have seen him lay that out. one of the interesting things this cycle is that both candidates have deep ties to the tech industry. that can certainly shape their policies moving forward. host: how are artificial intelligence companies, not knowing who the next administration is going to be come january, how are they approaching the potential for regulation? are they doing anything themselves to potentially self regulate? guest: we have seen several efforts. one we saw from the industry this year was the munich accord, an effort to create an agreement between more than a dozen tech companies around how they would attempt to protect the election and adopt best practices when it comes to artificial intelligence. we have seen some companies take a voluntary pledge with the

biden lighthouse to develop these products responsibly -- white house to develop these products responsibly and address issues like discrimination. we have seen voluntary measures. we've also seen the company significantly ramp up their efforts lobbying and washington, d.c. over the last year as artificial intelligence regulation is more top of mind. you have a working group in congress who has been doing work on this front. you have initiatives from the biden administration. the companies are really looking ahead and planning how to calculate their political strategies depending on who is in the white house next year. host: joe in georgia on the line for democrats. are you there? caller: yes, can you hear me? hello? host: yes, go ahead. caller: i would like to say in response to her elon musk

comment, zuckerberg, zuckerberg, zuckerberg 2020 speaking of money in politics. host: any response? guest: i think that that is a reference to the work that the zuckerberg initiative did around voting access in 2020. i would say either this is distinct in terms of the direct donation and actual rallying alongside trump that we've seen on the campaign trail from elon musk this cycle. of course, we have same political activity from tech ceos over the years, but this is a new level we are seeing this cycle from elon musk. host: jessica in aurora, illinois on the line for independents. caller: good morning. i want to know if artificial intelligence could have anything to do with the fact that i see chuck schumer showing up at some

donald trump events, dinners in washington and other things? -- washington and other things? guest: i haven't seen that example on social media, but it is very possible when you see images that seem unbelievable. people you don't think would be meeting or having dinners together, that is a good time to check, what is the source of this photo? potentially do a reverse image search and see if you can find instances where it has been reported by reliable media outlets. that is one way to check if the images are accurate or not. host: angela in florida on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i had a concern. the caller and then the reporter spoke about the insulin of one

person, in this case we are talking about elon musk and his media ownership in the election. what i didn't hear is the converse of that, the insulin of the cbs, abc, nbc, all of these network companies. that influence, where we saw billions of dollars, billions, billions of dollars come into the harris campaign. there is no comment of that media influence in the election. i would like to hear the reporter speak a little about that. guest: so, i think what you are may be referring to is advertising dollars this political cycle? what i would say is the abc, cbs, these companies really strive to provide nonpartisan news coverage of what is going on during the selection.

that is distinct from what we are seeing from elon musk where he is appearing on the campaign trail on behalf of donald trump doing rallies all weekend in pennsylvania right now to support one specific candidate. host: gary in arlington, texas on the independent line. good morning, gary. caller: ladies, i will start off by saying good morning and thank you for presenting this subject. i want to say something very quickly before i make my comments. washington post, i think you guys really need to focus more on the january 6 case with jack smith's evidence coming out. i think you are doing a disservice to the american people. moving forward, i was listening to mark cuban last night, there is a great collaboration on ai. mark cuban is heavily into ai.

i think that they provided a great collaboration on how that is going to be moving so further into the 21st century. i think that america cannot lose that image to china as well -- that edge to china as well. i am in the medical research in cancer and we use a lot of artificial intelligence. i think that that's major. however, i think that the washington post representative here, her eyes seemed to light up when she talks about jd vance. he is a liar. just mentioning his name with the damage he has done to the haitian community and lies about the election, i think putting his face on television in view of the american people is a big disservice to the american people.

i think that you guys need to make a huge correction in even using him on your show. i think it is a bad idea. host: your response? guest: i would say in terms of jd vance, he has of course spread falsehoods about what is happening in ohio with the immigrant community there. no one here is disputing that on this show. we were talking about his connections to the tech community and what that would mean for the regulation of artificial intelligence. the point that you bring up around china and ai is a really important one and is driving a lot of the debate now in washington about how you address this technology. there really is concerned that if you go too far on regulation it could hamstring the u.s. in terms of developing this technology. we are hearing politicians from both parties talk about that issue more and more. host: trish in california on the

independent line. good morning, tricia. caller: how are you? host: we are doing well. caller: you sound great. i wanted to ask her about her bringing up elon musk the way she has and not commenting about the soros situation. all of the money that has been pouring in to their benefit, to the democrat benefit. why is it a problem when everybody campaigns? i don't understand her concept with elon musk. host: cat,\ i know that you addressed this with another caller, but any response for that caller? guest: what is distinct is that elon musk that we have been discussing throughout this interview is that he owns a social media company. that is a unique dynamic this election cycle that we haven't

seen before. where the owner of one of the major social networks is campaigning on behalf of one of the presidential candidates. host: portland, oregon on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: i realize ai does have a place and will be important for solving problems medically maybe even worldwide, but i think that we need responsible guards of that. what terrifies me the most is donald trump is going to be elected, and then he is going to lose his mind within ofu -- within four years. there is no way that that brain is going to last for four more years making any sense out of anything. i think he is so dangerous. i think elon musk is waiting in the wings, because he knows that he can manipulate trump however

he wants, and he wants to rule the world. or you have jd vance sitting there, someone with the lowest iq i've ever seen, i mean really, these people are going to run this country if we elect donald trump. host: any response, cat? guest: i think that there is a question of how much influence elon musk and other major tech donors will have over a potential trump administration. i think that is a big question mark going forward. there have been various proposals of the role elon might play in that administration. perhaps a government efficiency committee has been floated. their questions about how it might benefit his own business interests with companies like spacex and others. that is something that we are looking into now at the washington post. host: the makeup of congress

could be changing depending on the outcome of the election next month. when it comes to regulation and what congress has done so far or looked at this issue, could that have any impact on the change in congress when it comes to efforts to regulate? guest: so far we have seen the senate majority leader chuck schumer lead a lot of the work on artificial intelligence regulation. he formed the working group with several democrats and republicans, where they looked into proposals of how could you chart a bipartisan path forward on creating more funding for the development of this technology and also mitigate some of the risks? if the senate leadership were to turn over, i think it's a real question mark if we see republicans move forward with the same path on that front after months of hearings and

meetings. you could see a lot of this work reset if the leadership of congress changes. host: judy in highland park, illinois on the line for democrats. caller: hi. i just want to thank you for your show. it's fantastic. i also want to say that i love ai. i am an older citizen. i retired finally. i use ai all the time with my google search. my daughter is going back to finish her phd in ai in education. she is going to be helping teachers who are struggling with teaching higher math concepts in high school and college to use ai to help them with it. of course it is frightening because it is so unusual, but i want to say that we have to have an educated electorate.

there is a program that just started where children at the age of five on up are learning how to distinguish between real imagery, real news and fake news. i think we need to start that asap and have guardrails for this kind of technology, because it will help us with so many kinds of problems we have. that's it. i am a true democrat writing my postcards right now. guest: thank you for the call. i think it's important to remember that there are many benefits of artificial intelligence. people are using it more and more in the workplace and schools for a lot of positive use cases, as you laid out. i think the challenge is this election season finding that

balance so it doesn't exacerbate this information online. your point about media literacy is one that we hear more and more about in this debate. i think that there are partisan concerns around how you would do that, especially with funding from the federal level, but we are seeing more initiatives and nonprofits try to do that work. host: dane in tennessee on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. yes, ma'am. will ai become a crutch for all students? kind of like the calculator was early on in my day, me being an old hillbilly in the mountains? will it become a crutch for kids? and are we in a cold war with australia with musk and the fox news guy? are they trying to overthrow the united states government? guest: thank you for the

question. on the first part of this being a crutch for students, i think we have constantly seen students have to adapt to new technologies. when i talk to teachers and professors about artificial intelligence, i often hear them say that they want students to start using ai. not to generate an entire paper, but to help them in the research process or just start learning about the capabilities of this technology. much like a calculator or a google search, or any of the technologies that we've had introduced over the last decade, this is something that they are one day going to be using in the workplace, so they will have to learn how to adapt to that. i didn't quite catch the question on australia, so i won't be able to answer that one. host: elizabeth in california, line for democrats. caller: good morning, c-span.

one quick note. yesterday, there was an incredible forum on ai on c-span. it was with the current administration and these folks are doing to try to head off problems. what i want to say is, we have the template or one technology that has run amok, and that is television. you have callers that call in every day that are incredibly misinformed because they watch fox news. fox news was fined almost $1 million for misleading election about the prior election where even trump and jd vance denied that they lost that election. they lost by 7 million votes. yesterday, the producer of "the apprentice" has now come out and said, as a successful

businessman was an artificial construct of that program. they created the boardroom and all the little adventures that were done to make trump look like a successful businessman when he had absolutely bankrupted at least four businesses at that point. i want to remind people that trump was a trust fund baby, they said he had a $200,000 trust fund when he was three. he was a millionaire by the time he was eight. he was given $400 million by his father. that man is not suitable for a president because all he thinks about is enriching himself. host: cat? guest: i don't think that i have anything to add on this comment. that is outside my purview as a tech policy reporter. host: one last call, kay in

detroit, michigan on the line for democratss. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead. caller: i have two quick comments. one comment and a question. i hear people calling in and comparing elon musk to george soros. from what i understand, george soros did not make his money working for the u.s. government and elon musk donating and campaigning for trump is courtesy of a military contractor donating taxpayer money. not only republicans, but independents and democrats. that is the problem i have with him and what he's doing. he is doing taxpayer money. using our money to do it. my question for ai is, any

information it can give to medical research? guest: i didn't quite get that question. host: she is talking about the potential benefit ai could have to medical procedures. guest: there is a lot of research on how ai could benefit medical procedures. one area is in screenings and radiology where ai may be able to detect abnormalities better than a human eye in some instances and cut down on the work. there are also ways that this technology could potentially cut down on the work of physicians. when you think about all of the administrator tasks and notetaking that can come along with that work. there are early applications on that front with ai right now. host: our guest, cat zakrzewski,

is a technology reporter with the washington post. thank you for being with us this morning. guest: thank you so much. host: that does it for today's "washington journal" and we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. until then, enjoy your day. ♪ ♪ >> c-span's "washington journal," our live forum involving you to discuss latest public policy from washington and across the country. coming up sunday morning, we will talk about this year's campaign in the battleground