As California considers landmark legislation on artificial intelligence, a new, first-of-its-kind poll conducted in partnership between opposing sides of the debate about it finds that a decisive majority of voters in the state support the measure. Specifically, the survey shows more than 6 in 10 voters are in favor of Senate Bill 1047, which would introduce new safety and compliance requirements for developers of large AI models.

After criticism of past public opinion research demonstrating widespread support for the AI legislation being debated in California, this new poll’s questions and their wording were developed in collaboration between AIPI Executive Director Daniel Colson and Dean Ball—a Research Fellow at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center who supports AI development but is skeptical of regulating the technology. 

The survey questions reflect a balanced approach to gauging public opinion on SB 1047, accurately presenting the perspectives and arguments from both its supporters and opponents.

For example, the wording of the poll’s first question reads as follows: 

“The California Bill, SB 1047, known as the Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act, would establish new requirements for developers of large AI models in California, including implementing safety protocols, conducting audits, and certifying compliance. The bill would also create a new state board to regulate these AI models and authorize the Attorney General to bring civil actions for violations. Opponents of SB 1047 argue that it could cause centralization of power within the AI industry, particularly by harming open-source AI, which they believe is essential for competition, innovation, and even research into making AI systems safer. Supporters of SB 1047 argue that future powerful AI models may be used for dangerous purposes, such as cyberattacks or aiding in the development of biological weapons. They say California must ensure that AI developers are taking safety precautions. Do you support or oppose this bill?”

The poll’s findings:

• 62% of California voters support SB 1047, while 25% oppose it. The support is bipartisan—68% of Democrats, 58% of independents, and 53% of Republicans are in favor of it.
• When asked to consider arguments from both sides of the issue, 54% of voters agree more with proponents of SB 1047, while 28% align with its opponents. The poll indicates that opponents argue that SB1047 could lead to a concentration of power in the AI industry, that AI legislation should focus on regulating current harms, and that long-term risks should be addressed at the national level rather than by the state. A majority of Democrats agree more with the arguments in support of the bill (61% support, 24% oppose), as well as a plurality of Republicans (46% support, 35% oppose).
• When presented with political, media, and tech industry figures who support or oppose the bill, 48% side with supporters of the legislation, including the majority of the California State Legislature, The Los Angeles Times, AI pioneers Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio, Elon Musk, and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) California. They believe SB 1047 is necessary to ensure the safe development of advanced AI systems and that the bill’s requirements for safety testing and risk assessment will protect public safety while keeping California at the forefront of AI innovation. 
• Meanwhile, 33% side with critics of the bill, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, San Francisco Mayor London Breed, numerous academic and civil society organizations, and many AI startups and investors. These critics argue that the legislation risks stifling innovation through burdensome regulations and warn that the bill’s vague language and extensive requirements could disproportionately impact startups and smaller companies, hindering growth and innovation in California’s tech sector.
• When asked, 48% of voters agree more with the supporters of SB 1047, while 33% side with the opponents, and 19% remain unsure. Support remains strong across party lines, with 50% of Democrats, 45% of independents, and 47% of Republicans agreeing more with the arguments in favor of the bill, compared to 32% of Democrats, 28% of independents, and 38% of Republicans who align more with the bill’s opponents.
• On the democratization of AI vs. safety debate, 54% are more concerned about the risk of bad actors using AI for malicious purposes, while 31% are primarily worried about the concentration of power within Big Tech and closed-source AI models.
• On the question of whether California should take the lead in regulating artificial intelligence or wait for federal legislation, 47% of voters believe California should take the lead in regulating AI if Congress remains inactive, while 34% think only the federal government should handle AI regulation to avoid a patchwork of confusing and innovation-deterring state laws.

About the Poll 

The poll surveyed 1,018 likely California voters on Sept. 13 and Sept. 14 2024, through online web panels. The margin of error is ±3.5 percentage points. The poll was conducted in English and weighted for education, gender, race, survey engagement, and 2020 election results.

See full toplines and crosstabs here.

About the Artificial Intelligence Policy Institute

The Artificial Intelligence Policy Institute is an AI policy and research think tank founded by Daniel Colson to advocate for ethical oversight of AI for mitigating potential catastrophic risks posed by AI. AIPI’s core mission is that the general public has valid concerns about the future of AI and is looking for regulation and guidance from their elected representatives. If politicians want to represent the American people effectively, they must act aggressively to regulate AI’s next phases of development. AIPI seeks to work with the media and policymakers to inform them of the risks of artificial intelligence and develop policies that mitigate risks from emerging technology while still benefiting from artificial intelligence.

While much of the public discussion has been oriented around AI’s potential to take away jobs, AIPI will be focused on centering the importance of policies designed to prevent catastrophic outcomes and mitigate the risk of extinction. Currently, most of the AI space comprises those with a vested interest in advancing AI or are academics. The AI space lacks an organization to both gauge and shape public opinion on the issues—as well as to recommend legislation on the matter— and AIPI will fill that role. 

Ultimately, policymakers are political actors, so the country needs an institution that can speak the language of public opinion sentiment. AIPI’s mission is about being able to channel how Americans feel about artificial intelligence and pressure lawmakers to take action.

AIPI will build relationships with lawmakers by using polling to establish AIPI as a subject matter expert on AI safety and policy issues. Politicians are incentivized to support AI slowdown policies due to the strong majority of voters supporting slowdown and regulation. But AI is currently less salient as a political issue than other topics, as so far, there have only been moderate impacts from emerging AI tech. 

AI technological advancement is and will continue to be an evolving situation, and politicians, the media, and everyday Americans need real-time information to make sense of it all. AIPI’s polling will show where people stand on new developments and provide crucial policy recommendations for policymakers. 

About Dean Ball 

Dean Woodley Ball is a Research Fellow at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center and author of the Substack Hyperdimensional. His work focuses on artificial intelligence, emerging technologies, and the future of governance. Previously, he was Senior Program Manager for the Hoover Institution’s State and Local Governance Initiative. 

He has published on topics including artificial intelligence, neural technology, biotechnology, political theory, public finance, infrastructure, and prisoner re-entry. His paper “Neither Harbour nor Floor: Contemplating the Singularity with Michael Oakeshott” will be published in a forthcoming volume titled Liberalism Revisited, to be published by Palgrave. He is the author of “Ideas of Another Order: Michael Oakeshott and Confucius in Conversation,” an essay in comparative political theory between the West and China, which was published in Collingwood and British Idealism Studies. His writing has appeared in National Affairs, The Dispatch, The Hill, the Orange County Register, Investor’s Business Daily, the Coolidge Quarterly, and National Review, and his research has been published by the Manhattan Institute and the Hoover Institution.

Prior to his role at the Hoover Institution, he served as Executive Director of the Calvin Coolidge Presidential Foundation, based in Plymouth, Vermont and Washington, D.C. In that role he oversaw a foundation with assets of more than $20 million, an annual budget of $3 million, and the Coolidge Scholarship, a full-ride, merit-based undergraduate program that is among the most competitive and prestigious scholarships in the United States. He worked as the Deputy Director of State and Local Policy at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research from 2014–2018, and as Director of the Adam Smith Society from 2018–2020. In addition, he oversaw the Institute’s Hayek Book Prize, one of the most financially generous book prizes in the world. 

He has also worked as an independent consultant, allowing him to focus on projects near and dear to his heart. These have included efforts to reform policing in Argentina and Chile and to recreate, at small scale, the Florentine guild system for sacred liturgical art.