On September 12, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei released a lengthy open letter urging the entire AI industry to “pace the frontier”—meaning to slow the development pace of advanced models. To establish common safety standards across laboratories, the letter proposed granting independent safety evaluation organizations access to leading companies’ models.

This message received public backing from a series of prominent tech leaders, including Sam Altman (OpenAI), Elon Musk (SpaceXAI), and Demis Hassabis (Google DeepMind). Notably, Altman pledged that OpenAI would grant independent evaluators access comparable to that of internal staff. This event marks the first time top AI CEOs have stood together on the front lines of the safety issue.

The release of the letter was prompted by the resignation of an Anthropic researcher who accused AI corporations of “gambling with lives” in their rush toward self-improving superintelligence. Nevertheless, the perspective among politicians and ruling officials stands in stark contrast to that of industry insiders.

Reactions from politicians and ruling officials

As reported by the Financial Times, President Trump stated at a golf event in Ireland that the U.S. currently remains ahead of China in AI and emphasized his desire to maintain that lead, arguing that whichever nation masters AI will prevail.

At the same time, House Speaker Mike Johnson warned on CNN that Congress rushing to impose regulations on AI could become a “national security threat.” He emphasized: “If Congress rushes into an emergency session to try to regulate AI, we will lose the race to China.”

This stance aligns with the previous policy direction of the Trump administration. Earlier this year, the White House issued an AI framework designed to assert federal preemption, prevent individual states from enacting their own regulations, and shift the responsibility of child safety onto parents.

On the same day, September 13, former President Obama spoke at a Democratic fundraising event. He urged his party to make artificial intelligence a “central agenda” item and develop a “very clear plan of action” once they regain majority control of the House of Representatives.

Emphasizing the significance of AI, Obama shared: “This sector is moving at a rapid clip in the private sector. If we lack proper guardrails, the risks could be extremely dangerous. However, if managed effectively, this technology could deliver enormous benefits.” Highlighting AI’s extraordinary potential in medical diagnostics and drug development, the former president noted that he had spoken directly with both Amodei and Altman in a spirit of “equal dialogue.”

Echoing that view, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries also criticized Republicans, accusing them of “abdicating their governing responsibilities.”

The divide between industry and politics

The core issue is not about determining who is right or wrong, but rather reflects a profound divergence in risk perception between the AI tech sector and the political establishment. A thought-provoking paradox is unfolding: while leading AI executives are proactively calling to “slow down,” politicians are insisting on “speeding up” out of fear of losing ground to rivals.

Measures such as allowing independent audits of models or establishing common standards, as proposed by Amodei, represent concrete actions rather than mere rhetoric. Even so, without mandatory government regulatory frameworks, all voluntary commitments will rely entirely on each enterprise’s own discretion.

The upcoming vote on the Clarity Act next Tuesday will serve as a crucial test of the U.S. Congress’s determination to regulate the technology sector, spanning both AI and cryptocurrency. If even a crypto bill cannot make it through the Senate, the likelihood of passing a comprehensive regulatory framework for AI this year remains very slim.