Maybe like not spending more than you take in?

If you drag your feet on it, you are going to regret it because your competition in the real world is going to use it.

My questions are going to be focused on when you spend money like this bill does, what kind of return on investment are you going to get from it?

I am introducing on November 16th and looking for a good Democratic lead. We will get one, and I think this bill is going to go to town.

And you don't think that would be a wet blanket on the economy?

Maybe like not spending more than you take in?

I am introducing on November 16th and looking for a good Democratic lead. We will get one, and I think this bill is going to go to town.

What kind of return on investment are you going to get from it?

I think it is the place to start where we can build in what I think is going to completely change the landscape and it is going to save the Government a ton of money.

If you drag your feet on it, you are going to regret it because your competition in the real world is going to use it.

But it is also nearly insignificant as a percentage of the total issue. Would you agree with that?

So, Dr. Hendren, would you agree that anything to do with what this might do, say it's at 10 billion a year, is insignificant compared to the broader issue that we just spend way more than we can ever expect to take in.

We're currently running $2 trillion deficits annually.

Maybe like not spending more than you take in?

I think that we could do that easily.

We have got to be careful about that.

Fair to say we are on the cusp of all the potential that might be good ahead of us, but a lot of the potential issues, which would beg the kind of a general regulatory framework, are just coming to the surface.

I do believe that hearings like this... are key to putting some type of framework of common sense regulation around it.

I am anti-regulation by DNA, but this is an area where I think the Federal Government ought to act responsibly and prudently.

I think there is a lot there to be worried about.

I think there is a lot there to be worried about.

I am anti-regulation by DNA, but this is an area where I think the Federal Government ought to act responsibly and prudently.

I think AI could be used nefariously and will be by state actors to influence domestic issues.

We have got to be careful about that.

Fair to say we are on the cusp of all the potential that might be good ahead of us, but a lot of the potential issues, which would beg the kind of a general regulatory framework, are just coming to the surface.