According to Stewart Baker, a well-known attorney in Washington, DC, Congress is moving ahead with a data rules bill that would ensnare Americans in a muddle of quotas inside personal software.
The progressive bill has emerged from the Democrats ‘ campaign to banish claimed discrimination from” Artificial Intelligence” ( AI ) software, Baker told Breitbart News.
The bill aims to end “disparate impact” discrimination against the population groups that progressives have praised by ensuring that AI companies can sue if they do n’t level the outcomes of the software “algorithms” used by numerous Main Street businesses, Baker said.
But the demand for computer- enacted group leveling required by the , American Privacy Rights Act of 2024 , may assure countless business discrimination against some individuals, Baker said, adding:
He will submit an application to be hired, asked for a job, requested for medical coverage, requested insurance, or requested to purchase a home and obtain a mortgage, and the application will be processed according to a [software ] process that states,” We need to make sure we have screened the successful applicants by race, gender, and sexual preference. We have an algorithm that makes these decisions. Do n’t worry. It’s bias- costless and qualified as bias- complimentary”!
” It is a wonderfully ambitious efforts to bring restrictions into places in American life where they’ve always been, to overrule]the U. S. Supreme Court’s ] Harvard choice, and make it nearly impossible to undo”, Baker told Breitbart News.
The president’s regulation of decision- generating software even opens a new world for huge government and Beltway technocrats, he said. ” It is to technocracy what AI is to a desktop computer … it’s an opportunity to impose values ]via software ] without the messiness of having]citizens ] … voting you down”.
” It’s the same trend” by which social media companies and claimed fact- chess control the free talk of Americans, he added.
In an article for Reason.com, Baker warned:
Because the provision is included as part of a bipartisan bill setting federal privacy standards, something that has been out of reach in Washington for decades, it could be adopted without much scrutiny in a matter of weeks. And it appears that the bill breaks the deadlock by granting Republicans some of the federal preemption their business allies want while also granting Democrats and left-wing advocacy groups a provision that will quietly overrule Harvard decision and impose identity-based quotas on a sizable portion of American life.
This tradeoff first showed up in , a 2023 bill , that Democratic and Republican members of the House commerce committee , approved by an overwhelming 53- 2 vote. That bill, however, never won the support of Sen. Cantwell ( D- WA ), who chairs the Senate commerce committee. This time around, a lightly revised version of the bill has been endorsed by both Sen. Cantwell and her House counterpart, Cathy McMorris Rodgers ( R- WA ).
…
At bottom, it’s as simple as that. If you use an]software ] algorithm for any important decision about people—to hire, promote, advertise, or otherwise allocate goods and services—you must ensure that you’ve reduced the risk of disparate impact.
The Supreme Court is challenging the legality of quotas, most evidently in a 2023 decision that forbids racial quotas in university admissions. These quotas were a result of the 1960s campaign to end racial bias and promote affirmative action as a legal defense.
However, this bill does not explicitly impose quotes; rather, it only poses a threat to businesses if their private database numbers produce patterns and decisions that progressives disapprove, Baker said:”…
This is an attempt to delegate the quotas in a way that makes it difficult for people to realize they are being hurt and it is almost impossible to choose a lawyer for them.
If the bill is passed, he said,” Conservatives and moderates will oppose the hidden quotas,” but they will also face a difficult legal battle.
There will be an]legal ] argument that because it encourages — well, practically mandates — quotas that this would violate equal protection ]required by the constitution]. But I think]the bill ] has been designed to say” No, no, no, we’re just trying to make sure that we do n’t get biased results from algorithms, and obviously, the Equal Protection Clause does n’t like bias”. So you’d have to find]a judge ] who is willing to say that all of disparate impact]legal ] doctrine is constitutionally suspect. I’m not sure if a court will rule that the mechanism by which it occurs [in software ] is complicated enough for a lot of this to occur without even those who are disadvantaged knowing enough to file a lawsuit.
Businesses will use quota software, he continued, because they want to avoid lawsuits and negative publicity.
Since the 1970s, businesses have been using quotas. Tell them how many members of any particular class you want us to hire, and we’ll just hire them as long as we’re promised that we’re promised that no one will call us racist and no one will sue us, as long as they are guaranteed that they wo n’t be sued. The law gives the assurance that this is going to happen.
According to Baker, the bill is being pushed by Senate and House committee chairs from Microsoft Corp.’s state of Washington.
Sen. Maria Cantwell ( D- WA ), who chairs the Senate’s commerce committee, is touting the bill , for protecting” Americans’ Civil Rights”:
stops businesses from using people’s personal information to make a discriminatory use of them.
Allows individuals to opt out of a company’s use of algorithms to make decisions about housing, employment, healthcare, credit opportunities, education, insurance or access to places of public accommodation.
Requires annual reviews of algorithms to ensure they do not put individuals, including our youth, at risk of harm, including discrimination.
Retiring Republican Rep. McMorris Rodgers “is all over this”, said Baker. ” It’s on her website, she’s in love with it”.
Ironically, McMorris Rodgers is also attempting to expand online speech through a separate bill that would end the Sec. 230 law that regulates Internet speech:
The legislation aims to encourage Congress and other interested parties to work together over the next 18 months to develop and pass a new legal framework that will promote free speech and innovation while also supporting these businesses as good platform owners…
The quota bill, said Baker,” Is , great for]big- government ] progressives … because this is another technical lever that allows them to push a known unpopular — or at least not majority position — by these]hidden ] technical tools”.
