Back
SB 1047 Veto Message
governmentThis official veto message is a key primary source documenting the political and regulatory debate around compute-threshold-based AI safety legislation in California, reflecting real-world tensions between innovation, safety, and governance design choices.
Metadata
Importance: 62/100executive orderprimary source
Summary
Governor Newsom vetoed California's SB 1047, which would have imposed safety requirements on large AI model developers based on computational thresholds. He argued the bill's size-based regulatory approach is flawed because smaller specialized models can pose equal risks, and that effective AI regulation must be risk-based, contextually aware of deployment environments, and empirically grounded rather than relying on model scale as a proxy for danger.
Key Points
- •Vetoed SB 1047, which would have required safeguards against catastrophic harm for large AI models and created a Board of Frontier Models.
- •Key objection: regulating by compute cost/model size alone creates a false sense of security, as smaller specialized models may be equally or more dangerous.
- •Argues effective regulation must be risk-based, accounting for actual deployment context, decision-making criticality, and sensitive data use.
- •Newsom affirms California's role in AI regulation and calls for empirically grounded, science-based frameworks that evolve with the technology.
- •Signals openness to a California-only regulatory approach if federal action remains absent, but insists it must be evidence-driven.
Cited by 4 pages
| Page | Type | Quality |
|---|---|---|
| Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act | Policy | 66.0 |
| Failed and Stalled AI Proposals | Analysis | 63.0 |
| US State AI Legislation Landscape | Analysis | 70.0 |
| AI Proliferation | Risk | 60.0 |
Cached Content Preview
HTTP 200Fetched Mar 15, 20265 KB
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
SEP 2 9 2024
To the Members of the California State Senate:
I am returning Senate Bill 1047 without my signature.
This bill would require developers of large artificial intelligence (Al) models, and
those providing the computing power to train such models, to put certain
safeguards and policies in place to prevent catastrophic harm . The bill would
also establish the Board of Frontier Models - a state entity - to oversee the
development of these models.
California is home to 32 of the world's 50 leading Al companies , pioneers in one
of the most significant technological advances in modern history. We lead in this
space because of our research and education institutions, our diverse and
motivated workforce, and our free-spirited cultivation of intellectual freedom. As
stewards and innovators of the future, I take seriously the responsibility to
regulate this industry.
This year, the Legislature sent me several thoughtful proposals to regulate Al
companies in response to current, rapidly evolving risks - including threats to our
democratic process, the spread of misinformation and deepfakes, risks to online
privacy, threats to critical infrastructure, and disruptions in the workforce. These
bills, and actions by my Administration, are guided by principles of
accountability, fairness , and transparency of Al systems and deployment of Al
technology in California .
GOVERNOR GAVIN NEWSOM• SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 • (916) 445-2841
•
-- 1 of 3 --
SB 1047 magnified the conversation about threats that could emerge from the
deployment of Al. Key to the debate is whether the threshold for regulation
should be based on the cost and number of computations needed to develop
an Al model, or whether we should evaluate the system's actual risks regardless
of these factors. This global discussion is occurring as the capabilities of Al
continue to scale at an impressive pace. At the same time, the strategies and
solutions for addressing the risk of catastrophic harm are rapidly evolving.
By focusing only on the most expensive and large-scale models, SB 1047
establishes a regulatory framework that could give the public a false sense of
security about controlling this fast-moving technology. Smaller, specialized
models may emerge as equally or even more dangerous than the models
targeted by SB 1047 - at the potential expense of curtailing the very innovation
that fuels advancement in favor of the public good.
Adaptability is critical as we race to regulate a technology still in its infancy. This
will require a delicate balance. While well-intentioned, SB 1047 does not take
into account whether an Al system is deployed in high-risk environments,
involves critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data. Instead, the bill
applies stringent standards to even the most basic functions - so long as a
large system deploys it. I do not believe this is the best approach to protecting
the public from real threats posed by the technology.
Let me be
... (truncated, 5 KB total)Resource ID:
604c3963cf77f0fe | Stable ID: OTY3NGI3Yj