Miles Brundage says Newsom veto threatens presidential bid

The policy commentator argued that California Governor Gavin Newsom cannot overcome his decision to block safety standards for frontier artificial intelligence models.

A contested veto returns to national politics

Artificial intelligence policy commentator Miles Brundage stated that California Governor Gavin Newsom damaged his future White House prospects by rejecting the state's flagship artificial intelligence safety measure.¹ Brundage posted that if he participated in prediction markets, he would sell shares on Newsom winning the presidency.¹ Brundage asserted there is no chance the governor ever lives down his veto of Senate Bill 1047 given the current direction of artificial intelligence politics.¹

The veto killed the Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act, which state lawmakers passed in late August 2024.²³ Authored by California Senator Scott Wiener, the bill cleared both the state Assembly and Senate before Newsom returned it without a signature on September 29, 2024.²⁴ The measure sought to establish binding safety standards for the most advanced artificial intelligence systems developed by major technology companies.²⁴

The architecture of Senate Bill 1047

Senate Bill 1047 focused on developers creating massive models defined by computing power and design costs.²³ The legislation would have required developers of covered models to establish a prompt full shutdown mechanism, often described as a kill switch, in the event that software was misused or operated outside human control.²⁴ In addition, developers faced requirements to submit written safety and security protocols to the California Attorney General, conduct safety testing, and retain an independent third-party auditor annually.²⁴ The bill also prohibited operating models in ways that created an unreasonable risk of critical harm, defined as catastrophes causing mass casualties or comparable harm to public infrastructure, and authorized civil enforcement suits by the state attorney general.²³

The legislative debate produced unusual divisions across the technology industry.²⁴ OpenAI, Meta, venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opposed the legislation, arguing that the compliance burden would stifle technical innovation.²⁴ Jason Kwon, chief strategy officer at OpenAI, argued in a letter to Wiener that the bill would slow innovation and drive engineering talent out of California.⁴ Conversely, startup Anthropic, Tesla and xAI chief executive Elon Musk, the Los Angeles Times editorial board, the Center for AI Safety, and machine learning researchers Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio supported the regulatory framework.²⁴

The governor's rationale and alternative measures

In his official veto message, Newsom called the legislation well-intentioned but flawed in its technical assumptions.⁴⁵ He stated that the bill placed excessive scrutiny on the computing power of the largest models while ignoring the risks presented by smaller or specialized systems deployed in high-risk environments.³⁵ Newsom argued that applying stringent standards to basic functions would burden California companies in a global race and give the public a false sense of security.²³ The governor maintained that state regulation must rest on empirical evidence and science, promising to consult academic researchers, technical specialists, and federal officials on future policies.²³

Wiener disputed that reasoning following the veto, stating that the decision left the public dependent on voluntary corporate promises that are rarely enforceable.⁴ Wiener noted that the veto leaves large artificial intelligence developers without mandatory federal or state constraints amid ongoing paralysis in the United States Congress.⁴ While federal guidance exists through voluntary risk frameworks, lawmakers in Washington have not enacted binding statutes governing model development.²⁴

Newsom did not abandon the sector entirely, approving several narrower technology measures in the same legislative window.⁴⁵ The governor signed Assembly Bill 2013, which requires generative artificial intelligence developers to publish summaries of their training datasets on their websites starting January 1, 2026.³⁵ Newsom also signed Senate Bill 942, mandating watermarks on artificial intelligence content, alongside measures restricting deceptive political deepfakes and prohibiting unauthorized artificial intelligence replicas of actors.⁴⁵

Reporting note: this piece draws on public commentary from Miles Brundage published September 9, 2026, alongside reporting from NPR, the Center for Security and Emerging Technology, Crowell & Moring, and Morgan Lewis. Secondary did not conduct an interview for this brief.

Source: Miles Brundage via X, September 9, 2026

References

This article is based on 5 sources, listed in the order they are cited.

1. 1 H https://x.com/Miles_Brundage announcement · 9 Sep 2026 Commentator Says Newsom’s SB 1047 Veto Could Hurt Presidential Prospects See the source
2. 2 C crowell.com third party · 2 Oct 2024 Gov. Newsom Vetoes AI Bill but Leaves the Door Open to Future CA Regulation See the source
3. 3 M morganlewis.com third party · 1 Oct 2024 California Governor Vetoes AI Safety Bill SB 1047, Signs AB 2013 Requiring Generative AI Transparency See the source
4. 4 N NPR third party · 29 Sep 2024 California Gov. Newsom vetoes AI safety bill that divided Silicon Valley See the source
5. 5 C cset.georgetown.edu third party · 17 Oct 2024 Governor Newsom Vetoes Sweeping AI Regulation, SB 1047 | Center for Security and Emerging Technology See the source