Kratsios Calls on Congress to Back Federal AI Strategy

Michael Kratsios, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, appeared before the House Science Committee on Wednesday to defend President Donald Trump’s AI strategy and encourage Congress to work toward a federal AI standard, rather than a patchwork of state-level standards or international standards not set by the U.S.

The hearing centered on the Trump administration’s AI Action Plan, which aims to promote U.S. leadership in AI technology and standards development. That plan, published in July 2025, was co-authored by Kratsios and White House AI and Crypto Czar David Sacks.

At Wednesday’s hearing, Kratsios defended the administration’s efforts to block states from creating their own AI laws. At the urging of the White House, Congress considered similar prohibitions in the reconciliation megabill passed over the summer and, more recently, in the National Defense Authorization Act passed in December, but in both cases stripped out the language in the face of bipartisan opposition.

Following the prohibition’s removal from the NDAA last month, President Trump signed an executive order aimed at deterring state-level AI regulations through federal lawsuits and broadband funding cuts.

In her opening statement, Science Committee Ranking Member Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) said she believes Trump’s order is unconstitutional.

“I’m not here to defend every state AI law that’s been proposed or passed,” Lofgren said. “Some of what California has adopted to protect its people is appropriate, and other legislation the governor, with the support of the delegation, vetoed because they were not appropriate.”

Trump’s December order also directed Kratsios, along with Sacks, to “jointly prepare a legislative recommendation establishing a uniform federal policy framework,” though Kratsios emphasized at the hearing that the legislation sought by the order “should not preempt otherwise lawful state actions relating to child safety precautions, AI compute and data infrastructure, and also state government procurement and use of AI.”

He also highlighted the Trump administration’s opposition to international regulations. “We continue to push back against global AI governance at the UN, G7, APEC, and other forums, and to defend great American companies from foreign nations’ stifling regulatory regimes, “ Kratsios said.

Lofgren expressed general support for the AI Action Plan, but indicated it did not sufficiently address the risks of AI. She also expressed deep concern over the Trump administration profiting from or partially owning private companies.

“The government now owns nearly 10 percent of Intel, making it the largest shareholder. It holds equity positions in rare earth mining companies and is negotiating similar deals with quantum computing companies,” Lofgren said, accusing the Trump administration of “engaging in socialism” and “emulating the PRC.”

Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-CA), who chairs the House Science Committee’s Research and Technology Subcommittee, presented a more generous view of the administration’s stance on state AI laws.

“I don’t think anyone believes that the states shouldn’t have a lane in regulating AI, but I think what everyone believes is that there should be a federal lane and that there should be a state lane,” Obernolte said, adding that the federal government should decide where the guardrails are.

Obernolte praised the AI Action Plan’s overlap with the recommendations of the House Task Force on AI, which he chaired. That task force published its final report in December 2024. “This bipartisan effort resulted in 66 findings and 89 recommendations, many of which align with the AI Action Plan, including expanding access to computing power for researchers, investing in K-12 AI education, and advancing AI evaluations,” Obernolte said.

Both the AI Action Plan and the House task force report also emphasize the role of federal research agencies, such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology, in setting AI standards. Obernolte said a forthcoming “Great American AI Act” would formalize NIST’s Center for AI Standards and Innovation, or CAISI, formerly known as the U.S. AI Safety Institute. Obernolte also previously introduced legislation to codify the National Science Foundation’s National AI Research Resource, or NAIRR.

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), ranking member of the Research and Technology Subcommittee, expressed concern over cuts to NIST and the administration’s decision to pull support from initiatives such as the Manufacturing Extension Program and Manufacturing USA. “We’re losing talent and institutional knowledge. We’re shrinking. And frankly, we’re destroying our research capacity and undermining global competitiveness all while we’re supposed to be touting how we can lead on AI,” Stevens said.

The Trump administration’s budget proposal for 2026 recommended cutting NIST’s budget by 28%, but Congress is on track to pass a package of spending bills that would provide roughly level funding.

Kratsios said that attempts by the president to “right-size” the federal budget have always prioritized AI as a critical research priority. He separately noted that efforts such as the Genesis Mission, the administration’s flagship effort to advance scientific research using AI, will ensure “American technological and scientific dominance for our future generations” and fend off competition from nations such as China.

The threat of competition from China was a recurring theme at the hearing and the subject of a separate hearing, also held on Wednesday, by the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Near the end of the hearing, Kratsios said his office wants to “emphasize the use of federal R&D dollars towards American scientists and technologists that are staffed by Americans in their labs.” He added that his office will “make sure that as we put out [notices of funding opportunities] and other requests for funding, that we’re funding American students.”

It is unclear if those comments were intended to imply that OSTP is considering new citizenship requirements for federal research funding opportunities. OSTP did not respond to a request for comment before publication.

Kratsios’s comments came in response to a question from Rep. Rich McCormick (R-GA) about how to address leading U.S. universities recruiting large numbers of Chinese students who return to China after their studies are completed. “What do we do about that competition that we’re basically educating here and sending back there?” McCormick asked.