Today, we submitted a letter to Speaker Johnson, Leader Schumer, Leader Jeffries, and Leader McConnell in support of the Remote Access Security Act and the Enhancing National Frameworks for Overseas Critical Exports (ENFORCE) Act. Click here to download a pdf of the letter.
Dear Speaker Johnson, Leader Schumer, Leader Jeffries, and Leader McConnell:
We, the undersigned organizations dedicated to protecting U.S. national security and economic competitiveness by securing American dominance in artificial intelligence (AI) and other advanced technologies, write in support of the Remote Access Security Act and the Enhancing National Frameworks for Overseas Critical Exports (ENFORCE) Act. We commend the House for passing the Remote Access Security last week and urge the Senate to take it up and approve it expeditiously. We urge the House to follow up on the success of “China Week” by passing the ENFORCE Act and urge the Senate to follow.
As the U.S. and China jockey for global supremacy in AI, these bills would provide the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) critical tools to protect American intellectual property and prevent advanced U.S. dual-use technology from aiding our adversaries, particularly the People’s Liberation Army in China.
While U.S. export controls on the advanced chips and manufacturing equipment used for AI development have demonstrated effectiveness in hobbling China’s AI industry, glaring loopholes persist that allow state-run or state-affiliated Chinese entities to access advanced AI chips and models for nefarious ends through cloud computing platforms, harming U.S. interests.
The Remote Access Security Act would enable BIS to restrict the remote access of advanced AI chips already subject to export controls using cloud technology. In the months after the original export controls were enacted, imports of the most advanced AI chips ballooned in countries such as Singapore, allowing foreign cloud providers to sell Chinese entities remote access to AI training and hosting resources. This Act would simply authorize the BIS to deem remotely provided access to controlled AI chips an export by any other name. Recent reporting suggests that state-affiliated firms in China have accessed these chips through U.S. cloud technologies. The Remote Access Security Act would give the Commerce Department narrow and targeted authority to address this gap in its existing export control authority.
In a complementary manner, the ENFORCE Act would give BIS authority to prevent AI firms from selling or licensing advanced, dual-use models to adversarial entities. Chinese firms like ByteDance have already benefited from accessing American AI models. And while these particular models at this stage of AI development may not yet pose a national security or economic threat, progress is advancing rapidly. In the coming years, researchers expect the emergence of models with powerful dual-use capabilities, from bioweapon design to models that provide a significant advantage in offensive cyber operations.
The largest of these models will require investments in the billions of dollars. The arrangements between U.S. companies and Chinese tech giants thus evinces the potential for advanced U.S. technology to fall into the wrong hands. It is therefore prudent for Congress to provide the nation’s premier export authority in BIS the ability to protect national security, intellectual property, and America’s competitive edge in AI.
Some critics of the ENFORCE Act warn that the bill would hamper innovation and development of open-source AI. As supporters of open-source AI and U.S. leadership in the field, we take this concern seriously and would not support any effort to undermine the technology. However, in the case of the ENFORCE Act, we find this concern unfounded.
For one, BIS already exempts open-source technology from export controls, and the publication and public dissemination of technology is not considered an “export” by the agency. Further, open-source systems will not be developed and specialized in a way that threatens national security, such as hypersonic missile or bioweapon development.
Given their mission to restrict access to weapons of mass destruction and similarly sensitive technologies, we believe that BIS is well positioned to consider national security threats on a case-by-case basis. Rather than issue blanket controls, BIS’s mandate is to tailor export license requirements on only the most advanced, dual-use models whose export would pose a bona fide national security risk. When it comes to export controls, distinguishing between publicly available and certain licensed advanced open-source models strikes the right balance in supporting innovation while protecting U.S. security and intellectual property.
Far from hampering America’s position in technology, as some critics warn, these bills will enhance U.S. leadership. The U.S. leads the world in satellites and advanced AI chips—two industries subject to relatively strict export controls. In contrast, industries that have routinely sold advanced technology to China with little to no restriction, such as solar panel and electric vehicle manufacturers, have seen their design and IP outsourced to or stolen by Chinese firms. The Chinese Communist Party then subsidies national firms with stolen IP to sell at a loss in order to corner global markets as part of its Belt and Road Initiative.
We cannot allow China to run the same playbook when it comes to cloud computing and AI models. These bills, the Remote Access Security and ENFORCE Acts, are complementary efforts that will help the U.S. government and industry protect against such an outcome.
We support a policy environment that allows innovation to flourish while ensuring U.S. economic and national security. These bills will advance those goals, and we offer our full support. We thank the sponsors and committees for their leadership and work on these matters, and we respectively urge swift passage of the legislation. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Evan Swarztrauber
Senior Fellow, Foundation for American Innovation
Sam Hammond
Senior Economist, Foundation for American Innovation
Satya Thallam
Senior Vice President, Americans for Responsible Innovation
Ziven Havens
Director of Policy, Bull Moose Project
Tim Fist
Senior Technology Fellow, Institute for Progress
Geoffrey Cain
Fellow, National Security Institute
