内容来源：https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/829179/david-sacks-ai-executive-order

内容总结：

【独家深度】一份被紧急叫停的行政命令草案近日在华盛顿掀起政治风暴。这份旨在将人工智能监管权从各州收归联邦政府的文件，不仅暴露了科技巨头对政策制定的深度渗透，更意外引爆了共和党内部意识形态与科技资本之间的尖锐矛盾。

科技富豪权力扩张引发两党联合反制

据悉，这份原定于周五签署的行政命令草案要求司法部、商务部等四大机构在30至90天内建立专门工作组，对制定AI法规的州采取法律诉讼及联邦资金制裁等惩罚措施。草案中特别规定，所有执行部门必须咨询"人工智能与加密货币特别顾问"、南非裔科技亿万富翁大卫·萨克斯的意见。

"这无异于将美国AI政策闸门交由一个人掌控。"一位接近白宫的科技政策顾问透露。尽管其以临时政府雇员身份任职，但华盛顿圈内人视其为特朗普与科技巨头间的关键纽带。

政治反弹超预期 草根右翼与进步左翼罕见结盟

该草案立即引发多方强烈反弹：

• 民主党阵营公开反对
• 众议院"MAGA"系成员史蒂夫·班农在节目中激烈批评
• 佛罗里达州长德桑蒂斯等共和党州长明确表示抵制
• 司法部、商务部等原定执行机构被曝未参与草案磋商

值得关注的是，反对科技巨头过度扩张的进步派与维护传统价值的保守派，在监管科技企业问题上形成罕见共识。据知情人士透露，白宫内部已出现由拜登政府留任官员和强硬MAGA派系组成的"反萨克斯联盟"。

制度制衡显效 争议草案紧急撤换

分析指出，这份草案暴露出三大制度隐患：

1. 将国家标准技术研究院等专业机构排除决策体系
2. 授权联邦政府扣押高速公路拨款等关键资金胁迫各州
3. 法律专家指出其"在法庭上根本无法执行"

在强大政治压力下，白宫最终撤换原定计划，转而签署了一项要求国家实验室加强AI发展的无争议命令。新文件中，萨克斯的职务仅被提及一次。

此次事件折射出美国科技政策制定中，资本影响力与民主制度间的深刻张力。正如两党安全人工智能联盟政策主任所言："共和党基层在这件事上绝不支持萨克斯阵营，但这种立场分歧似乎并未动摇科技资本继续推进其议程的决心。"

（根据白宫新闻办公室最新声明，其拒绝就此事置评，仅坚持要求披露消息来源）

中文翻译：

周三，一则关于重大政策变动的传闻在华盛顿传开：据称白宫将于周五发布行政命令，最终将取代各州的人工智能法规，将这些监管权移交联邦政府。草案一经网络泄露，律师和政策制定者便开始逐字剖析。其中诸多内容在政治上似乎难以推行，更有大量条款显得过于宽泛甚至可能违法。多个政府机构突然被排除在决策圈外。

大卫·萨克斯试图扼杀各州人工智能立法——却玩火自焚
这份泄露的行政命令草案显示，这位科技亿万富翁正试图通过权力运作，成为美国人工智能政策的"守门人"。

但关键在于，人们发现大量权力将被授予某位潜入白宫西翼的南非裔科技亿万富翁——他如今摇身变为特聘政府雇员。此人并非埃隆·马斯克，而是另一位。
草案的每个章节都要求唐纳德·特朗普总统的内阁部长和机构负责人必须在90天内，就如何惩处制定人工智能法规的州份提交报告和指引。司法部长更需在30天内组建特别工作组起诉这些州。所有官员在执行命令时，都必须咨询人工智能与加密货币特别顾问、全球最具影响力的科技风险投资家之一——大卫·萨克斯。

"我不想称之为权力攫取，这个说法太过尖锐，"一位接近白宫的科技政策顾问表示，"但这无疑是对他权力的巩固。"
MAGA阵营立即爆发强烈反应。曾成功阻挠参议院人工智能暂停令的"战情室"主持人史蒂夫·班农，在周五节目中用大量时间讨论该草案。国会民主党人公开反对，对科技持怀疑态度的共和党人则悄然准备声明。人工智能政策界迅速发布报告，揭示该命令将如何使权力向白宫集中。这份原定周五签署的命令最终胎死腹中。

在白宫之外，这项行政命令即便签署也缺乏法律效力。但在白宫内部，它将被视为帝王敕令。特朗普的行政命令历来旨在迫使下属立即执行其意志，罔顾法律程序，待法院裁定违法时往往已造成不可逆的后果。例如其关税令虽可能被最高法院推翻，但已造成数万亿美元经济损失并损害美国国际关系。

白宫新闻办公室在被问询时拒绝置评，反而坚持要求透露消息来源。

若实施，该命令将成为悬在各州头上的达摩克利斯之剑。"若其生效，最致命的效果将是遏制州级立法，"人工智能法律研究所高级研究员查理·布洛克告诉《边缘》。草案某条款授权政府截留违规州的联邦资金——不仅是此前监管权之争中充当筹码的农村宽带补贴，更涵盖公路建设至教育资助等所有领域。"即便州政府最终通过诉讼追回资金，过程也将旷日持久。这足以让各州望而却步。"

如此，萨克斯便能一举成为美国人工智能政策的实际掌控者。

尽管多名白宫官员与科技界有联系，但仅具临时政府雇员身份的萨克斯被华盛顿圈内人视为特朗普与科技巨头CEO之间的核心纽带——后者视其为同类。（尽管副总统JD·万斯从政前曾在硅谷工作，但始终未跻身亿万富翁俱乐部。）

"从大局看，他试图维护美国竞争力；从私心说，他正以更狭隘的'这些都是自己人'方式保护科技行业，"那位白宫顾问点评道。

但萨克斯同时要化解第三重内部威胁：行政体系内来自激进左翼和强硬MAGA右翼的政治势力，这两股力量都执意要遏制其影响力。

即便在高度极化的政治环境中，左右两翼在监管科技巨头过度行为上立场一致，甚至公开联手对抗。幕后联合同样存在。据该顾问描述，非正式的反萨克斯联盟包括民主党拜登政府遗留的"主张严格监管乃至拆分科技企业"的官员，与现政府中"不信任科技公司，同样想在州或联邦层面限制其发展"的极右MAGA官员。

分析草案时，被排除在外的机构名单耐人寻味。
科技政策专家首先注意到：2023年拜登总统签署的全面人工智能行政命令曾授权众多机构制定AI政策，而这些机构（几乎全部）突然从新草案中消失。例如原负责人工智能风险管理评估和标准制定的美国国家标准与技术研究院（注：相关条款近期已被纳入加州AI安全法，该法正遭科技界强烈反对）。同样不见踪影的还有：统合科技政策上报渠道的科技政策办公室；专注网络安全威胁的网络安全与基础设施安全局；以及名称已昭示职能的人工智能标准与创新中心。

"实践中大卫·萨克斯或许会咨询这些机构，立法事务办公室也可能与之沟通，"两党联盟"保障人工智能安全"政策主管、拜登政府前律师里基·帕里克表示，"但未将其列入名单令人诧异。"

取而代之的是由四家机构执行暂停令：司法部将起诉违规州份，商务部分析各州宽带补贴资格，联邦贸易委员会调查各州是否存在意识形态偏见导致的"欺诈行为"，联邦通信委员会则制定联邦人工智能报告标准。所有这些机构——自然都将接受萨克斯的指导，并获授权惩处制定或执行人工智能法规的州。

民粹派共和党人（特别是MAGA基本盘）立即察觉到萨克斯在整个命令中的影响力，以及该命令对各州的威胁程度。尽管他们曾与科技右翼短暂结盟助特朗普当选，但因根本理念分歧逐渐倒戈：他们认为人工智能威胁保守家庭价值观、夺走美国人工作岗位，反感联邦侵犯州权，更鄙夷科技CEO从支持民主党转向特朗普的迅速变脸。多个红州已开始自定人工智能法规，佛罗里达州州长罗恩·德桑蒂斯和阿肯色州州长萨拉·赫卡比·桑德斯公开反对暂停令。即便特朗普公开支持也未能动摇基本盘。

"纯从政治策略角度，共和党基本盘在此事上不与大卫·萨克斯和马克·安德森同道，"长期担任共和党策略师的两党联盟"保障人工智能安全"CEO布伦丹·斯坦豪瑟指出，"而我认为他们根本不在乎，仿佛在说'这与我们何干？我们来此实现目标，这届政府还有三年任期。我们曾是哈里斯、拜登和希拉里支持者，现在支持特朗普只因有利可图'。"

人工智能界未曾料到MAGA势力会立即发难，甚至与政府内进步反科技派系结盟，而他们通过行政命令推行的硅 Valley激进做法反而加剧了裂痕。但这已足以令他们暂时退缩。次周华盛顿流传新传闻称政府将签署人工智能相关命令，最终确有其事——但内容截然不同：仅指示国家实验室加强人工智能研发，完全不涉及监管权之争，毫无争议。

人工智能与加密货币特别顾问仅在文件中被提及一次。

（11月25日更新：增补白宫新闻办公室回应）

英文来源：

On Wednesday, a rumor began popping up in Washington about a momentous policy change: the White House, it was said, would issue an executive order on Friday that would finally preempt state AI laws, handing over those regulatory powers to the federal government. The minute it leaked online, lawyers and policymakers began to scour every sentence of it. There was a lot about it that seemed politically unfeasible; there was even more that seemed overbroad, possibly illegal. There were a lot of agencies that had suddenly been cut out.
David Sacks tried to kill state AI laws — and it blew up in his face
A leaked executive order draft reveals the tech billionaire making a power play to become America’s AI policy gatekeeper.
A leaked executive order draft reveals the tech billionaire making a power play to become America’s AI policy gatekeeper.
But crucially, they noticed how much power would have been handed to a certain South African tech-billionaire-turned-special-government-employee who’d tunneled his way into the West Wing — not Elon Musk, but the other one.
In every section of the draft order, President Donald Trump was directing his cabinet secretaries and agency heads to imminently issue reports and guidance on how to punish states with AI laws, within the next 90 days. In the Attorney General’s case, they had 30 days to establish an entire legal task force to sue those states. Every single one of them would have to consult David Sacks, the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto — and one of the most influential tech venture capitalists in the world — while executing the order.
“I don’t want to say it was a power grab. That’s too strong of a term,” said a tech policy adviser close to the White House. “But it’s definitely a consolidation, as it were, of his power.”
The MAGA universe immediately exploded, with War Room host Steve Bannon — who’d managed to help kill a previous attempt at an AI moratorium in the Senate this year — dedicating part of his Friday show to the draft order. In Congress, Democrats revolted publicly; tech-skeptical Republicans were quietly preparing their statements. The AI policy world immediately issued reports illustrating how much power would have been sucked into the hands of the White House. The order had been scheduled to be signed on Friday — and then it never was.
Outside the White House, the AI executive order, had it been signed, would have been legally unenforceable. But inside the White House, it would have been treated as an imperial mandate. Trump’s executive orders are historically designed to force his underlings to get his will done immediately, legality be damned, and the fallout tends to be irreversible by the time that the courts find his actions illegal. His tariff order, for instance, may soon be overturned by the Supreme Court, but not before causing trillions in economic losses and damaging the US’s international relationships.
Asked for comment, the White House press office email run by Karoline Leavitt refused to comment on the record, instead only insistently asking us to name our sources.
And from there, it would have been used as a threat against the states. “I suspect that if it’s effective, the most effective part of it will be having a chilling effect on state legislation,” Charlie Bullock, a senior research fellow at the Institute for Law and AI, told The Verge. One section of the draft would have allowed the government to pull any federal funding from states in violation of the order — not just rural broadband grants, which had been used as leverage in previous preemption fights, but anything from highway funds to education grants. “Even if [a state] can win a court case to make them give them that funding eventually, it would take a long time. States might be convinced by that.”
As such, it would have turned Sacks into the US’s AI policy gatekeeper in one fell swoop.
Though there are several White House officials with ties to the tech industry, Sacks, who has a provisional government employment status, is seen by Washington insiders as Trump’s closest conduit with the big-name tech CEOs, who consider him as a peer. (Though Vice President JD Vance did work in Silicon Valley prior to politics, he never did break into the three-comma club.)
“He’s trying to maintain America’s competitive edge in the big picture, and you could say, in a more selfish manner, he’s trying to protect the tech industry [with] a more parochial, These are my people approach,” said the tech policy adviser close to the White House.
But Sacks was also trying to neutralize a third, internal threat: the political forces within the executive branch, both on the progressive left and hard MAGA right, that were hell-bent on curbing his influence.
Even in this hyperpartisan climate, the left and right share a common cause in regulating the excesses of Big Tech, and will even publicly join forces to oppose them. And it apparently takes place behind the scenes, too. As the tech policy adviser described it, the informal internal anti-Sacks alliance consisted of holdovers from the Democratic Biden administration “that were hyper-regulating and wanting to break up tech companies,” and the hard-right MAGA officials in his current administration “who don’t trust tech, and similarly want to regulate technology companies — either on the state level or on the federal level — and kneecap them.”
According to those analyzing the bill, it was telling which entities had been completely shut out.
The first move, spotted by tech policy experts, was identifying who’d been cut out. In 2023, President Joe Biden’s massive AI executive order empowered a broad swath of agencies to develop AI policy, and most — if not all of them — were suddenly absent. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), for instance, had been delegated to research AI risk management, evaluation, and standards development. (Those concerns, incidentally, were recently encoded in California’s AI safety law — a law that the AI industry has strenuously opposed.) Also missing: any mention of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), which centralizes the administration’s tech policies into one place before being brought to the President; the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the DHS agency that focuses on national security internet threats; or the Center for AI Standards and Innovation (CAISI), the name of which speaks for itself.
“Maybe in practice, David Sacks will be consulting them and the [Office of Legislative Affairs] might be communicating with them,” said Riki Parikh, the policy director for the bipartisan Alliance for Secure AI and a former lawyer for the Biden administration. “But it’s surprising to not list them out.”
Instead, the proposed moratorium would have been carried out by four agencies: the Department of Justice, which would have sued the states in violation of the order; the Department of Commerce, which would analyze which states could lose their broadband funding; the Federal Trade Commission, which would have investigated which states would be engaged in “deceptive conduct” over ideological bias; and the Federal Communications Commission, which would have developed a federal AI reporting standard.
All, naturally, would be advised by Sacks — and all of them now had power to pursue ways to punish states that wrote or enforced AI laws.
Populist Republicans, particularly those in the MAGA base, immediately saw how much Sacks had influence throughout the entire order, and how much the order would threaten any state. Though they had briefly aligned with the tech right in getting Trump elected, Republicans increasingly turned on their allies over a complete ideological mismatch: they believe AI is a threat to conservative family values and will steal American jobs, are allergic to federal incursion into states’ sovereignty, and hold a general disdain for how quickly tech CEOs went from supporting Democrats to Trump. Several red states have begun writing their own AI regulations, and governors like Florida’s Ron DeSantis and Arkansas’ Sarah Huckabee Sanders have openly voiced their dissent against a moratorium. Even Trump’s open support of a moratorium hasn’t swayed the base.
“Purely just from a political strategy standpoint, the base of the Republican Party is not with David Sacks and [fellow VC and Trump supporter] Marc Andreessen on this. They’re just not,” said Brendan Steinhauser, a longtime Republican strategist and the CEO for the bipartisan Alliance for Secure AI. ”And I don’t think they care because they’re just like, It doesn’t matter to us. We’re here to get what we want and there’s three years remaining in this administration. We were Harris and Biden and Hillary supporters, and then we became Trump supporters because it’s convenient.”
Little did the AI world anticipate that MAGA would immediately try to kneecap them, even joining forces with the progressive anti-tech factions in government, and that their aggressive Silicon Valley approach via executive order would have further widened the rift. But it was enough for them to back off temporarily. The following week, a new rumor circulated Washington that the administration would sign an AI-related order, and they did — but for a completely different, non-preemption, very uncontroversial project directing the National Labs to engage more with AI development.
The Special Advisor on AI and Crypto was mentioned only once.
Update, November 25th: Added comment from the White House press office.