Congress convened in a roundtable format to discuss the potential of artificial intelligence, but the discussion quickly turned to what lawmakers described as existential risks as AI capabilities advance. In a House Oversight Committee subcommittee session on “Artificial Intelligence and American Power,” several members voiced concerns that policy and oversight may lag the technology’s speed and reach.
Rep. James Walkinshaw, a Virginia Republican, said he was alarmed about the possibility that federal workers may use AI chatbots to handle sensitive government data. Rep. William Timmons of South Carolina pressed the question of whether it should be illegal for AI systems to use someone’s likeness to create pornographic images, drawing attention to misuse risk and identity-based harms.
Other members focused on national security and military scenarios. Rep. John McGuire, also a Virginia Republican, said he was concerned that AI systems could deny U.S. military forces from taking lethal actions due to a model’s conclusion for “moral” behavior. Rep. Yassamin Ansari, a Democratic representative from Arizona, raised multiple concerns that included the Trump administration’s use of AI in the war with Iran as well as the technology’s intensive energy usage and possible effects on the climate.
The hearing also reflected a divide between fear-driven questions and optimism about AI’s benefits. Rep. Dave Min, a California Democrat, said, “People in our districts across this country are going to start feeling impacts very soon, and if we don’t start thinking properly and aggressively and proactively about the challenges that AI creates, I fear that we’re going to have a revolution on our hands.” The subcommittee ranking Democrat, Rep. Maxwell Frost of Florida—who described himself as the youngest member of Congress—said he worried lawmakers and the industry could move ahead faster than governance.
Frost said he did not have confidence that Congress could put guardrails in place in time, arguing that delay could lead to serious harm. “I don’t have faith in this institution to actually put the common sense guardrails in place. And then we fast forward ten years, and the house is on fire,” he said. “That won’t be good for anybody, whether it’s the industry or working families and people, or this institution itself.”
While members raised worries, others acknowledged AI’s rapid industrial and business momentum. Rep. Eric Burlison, a Missouri Republican, kicked off the meeting by praising the industry and describing what he called an impressive demonstration of AI helping automate and fast-track manufacturing in a company’s factories. Burlison said, “It’s truly like the closest thing to Star Trek I’ve ever seen,” and later asked what congressional districts should do to attract AI firms for business.
Several lawmakers also questioned how advanced AI models are being developed and constrained by technology companies. They discussed disclosures from technology firm Anthropic, including its Mythos AI model, which the company has said has capabilities so powerful that it limits its use to select customers. Lawmakers said the company’s work appeared to involve bypassing traditional cybersecurity and hacking major institutions, including banks, government agencies and large corporations.
Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona, a Republican and former Navy SEAL who served in combat, said, “I recognize AI is not going anywhere.” Crane added that he was concerned about whether the country could be “simultaneously engineering our own destruction” as it competes in what he described as an AI race.
On the expert side, participants urged lawmakers to base policy on detailed understanding. Mark Beall, president of government affairs at the AI Policy Network Inc. and a former Pentagon official, warned that Congress risked losing the country’s competitive edge on AI if it did not act on national security concerns. Beall said the issue required attention and action to protect the nation’s standing.
Robert Atkinson, founder of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, told lawmakers, “I don’t think it’s going to kill us.” At the same time, Atkinson said it was important for the federal government to seriously fund AI safety research and said the country “need[s] to know a lot more about how the models work.”
Spencer Overton, a George Washington University law professor, said the incentives for AI companies “are really what they should be” when lawmakers asked whether the firms were good actors. Overton told lawmakers that constituents expect elected officials to protect them rather than relying on companies. “Constituents are looking for you, not for companies, to step up and protect them,” he said. “They’re trusting you, the person that they voted for, to do that, as opposed to companies. That’s the way the system works, right?”