**Legislative gridlock and partisan divides on scope remain the main drivers behind the 69.5% market-implied probability that no comprehensive federal AI framework passes before 2028.** As of September 2026, Congress has enacted only narrow measures such as the Take It Down Act on deepfakes, while broader proposals—including the June 2026 Great American AI Act discussion draft on frontier AI transparency, third-party audits, and limited state preemption—have stalled in committee or failed to reach the floor. House Science Committee advanced a bipartisan package of ten AI bills on research, security, and workforce issues in June, yet none advanced further before the September adjournment ahead of midterms. Senate Commerce Committee negotiations on safety guardrails continue but face resistance over preemption and concerns that strict rules could slow U.S. large language model development relative to China. The Trump administration’s deregulatory executive orders and National AI Legislative Framework emphasize voluntary standards and innovation over binding statutes. Key near-term catalysts include post-midterm sessions and any high-profile AI safety incidents that could shift consensus.
Ringkasan eksperimental yang dihasilkan AI dengan referensi data Polymarket. Ini bukan saran trading dan tidak berperan dalam bagaimana pasar ini diselesaikan. · DiperbaruiLegislation establishes a comprehensive federal framework for artificial intelligence if its enacted text contains provisions in both of the following categories:
(1) Standards or testing: the legislation directs a federal agency or body (for example, the National Institute of Standards and Technology) to develop, adopt, or maintain technical standards, benchmarks, testing frameworks, or evaluation capacity for artificial intelligence systems.
(2) Transparency, disclosure, or risk management: the legislation requires transparency, disclosure, reporting, or risk-management practices for artificial intelligence systems, either as obligations on private-sector developers or deployers, or as guidelines or frameworks that a federal agency is directed to develop or adopt for use by federal agencies, whether mandatory or voluntary. Findings, sense-of-Congress language, and provisions that only authorize a study or require a one-time report to Congress will not satisfy this category.
The qualifying provisions must apply to artificial intelligence systems generally, either government-wide or to private-sector developers or deployers. Provisions that govern only the artificial intelligence systems developed, procured, or used by a single federal department or agency, or only defense, national security, or intelligence applications (for example, Department of Defense or intelligence community provisions in a National Defense Authorization Act or Intelligence Authorization Act), will not qualify. Qualifying provisions may be enacted as a standalone act or as a distinct title or division of a broader act.
Pending legislation that this market is intended to capture includes the American Leadership in AI Act (H.R. 8516, 119th Congress) and the Great American Artificial Intelligence Act of 2026 (Obernolte-Trahan discussion draft released June 4, 2026). Whether any legislation qualifies will be determined solely by whether its enacted text satisfies the requirements above, regardless of its title or sponsors.
Legislation that satisfies only one of the two categories above will not qualify. Legislation whose artificial intelligence provisions apply only to a single application, sector, or technology (for example, semiconductor or chip export controls, deepfakes or digital replicas, chatbots or companion applications, data centers or their electricity use, autonomous vehicles, or the funding of a research resource such as the National Artificial Intelligence Research Resource) will not qualify, even if it contains standards, testing, disclosure, or reporting provisions for that application. Legislation that became law before January 1, 2026, including the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act of 2020, will not qualify.
The primary resolution source for this market will be Congress.gov's legislation tracker (https://www.congress.gov/) and other official information from the government of the United States; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Pasar Dibuka: Sep 17, 2026, 5:06 PM ET
Resolver
0x65070BE91...Legislation establishes a comprehensive federal framework for artificial intelligence if its enacted text contains provisions in both of the following categories:
(1) Standards or testing: the legislation directs a federal agency or body (for example, the National Institute of Standards and Technology) to develop, adopt, or maintain technical standards, benchmarks, testing frameworks, or evaluation capacity for artificial intelligence systems.
(2) Transparency, disclosure, or risk management: the legislation requires transparency, disclosure, reporting, or risk-management practices for artificial intelligence systems, either as obligations on private-sector developers or deployers, or as guidelines or frameworks that a federal agency is directed to develop or adopt for use by federal agencies, whether mandatory or voluntary. Findings, sense-of-Congress language, and provisions that only authorize a study or require a one-time report to Congress will not satisfy this category.
The qualifying provisions must apply to artificial intelligence systems generally, either government-wide or to private-sector developers or deployers. Provisions that govern only the artificial intelligence systems developed, procured, or used by a single federal department or agency, or only defense, national security, or intelligence applications (for example, Department of Defense or intelligence community provisions in a National Defense Authorization Act or Intelligence Authorization Act), will not qualify. Qualifying provisions may be enacted as a standalone act or as a distinct title or division of a broader act.
Pending legislation that this market is intended to capture includes the American Leadership in AI Act (H.R. 8516, 119th Congress) and the Great American Artificial Intelligence Act of 2026 (Obernolte-Trahan discussion draft released June 4, 2026). Whether any legislation qualifies will be determined solely by whether its enacted text satisfies the requirements above, regardless of its title or sponsors.
Legislation that satisfies only one of the two categories above will not qualify. Legislation whose artificial intelligence provisions apply only to a single application, sector, or technology (for example, semiconductor or chip export controls, deepfakes or digital replicas, chatbots or companion applications, data centers or their electricity use, autonomous vehicles, or the funding of a research resource such as the National Artificial Intelligence Research Resource) will not qualify, even if it contains standards, testing, disclosure, or reporting provisions for that application. Legislation that became law before January 1, 2026, including the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act of 2020, will not qualify.
The primary resolution source for this market will be Congress.gov's legislation tracker (https://www.congress.gov/) and other official information from the government of the United States; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Resolver
0x65070BE91...**Legislative gridlock and partisan divides on scope remain the main drivers behind the 69.5% market-implied probability that no comprehensive federal AI framework passes before 2028.** As of September 2026, Congress has enacted only narrow measures such as the Take It Down Act on deepfakes, while broader proposals—including the June 2026 Great American AI Act discussion draft on frontier AI transparency, third-party audits, and limited state preemption—have stalled in committee or failed to reach the floor. House Science Committee advanced a bipartisan package of ten AI bills on research, security, and workforce issues in June, yet none advanced further before the September adjournment ahead of midterms. Senate Commerce Committee negotiations on safety guardrails continue but face resistance over preemption and concerns that strict rules could slow U.S. large language model development relative to China. The Trump administration’s deregulatory executive orders and National AI Legislative Framework emphasize voluntary standards and innovation over binding statutes. Key near-term catalysts include post-midterm sessions and any high-profile AI safety incidents that could shift consensus.
Ringkasan eksperimental yang dihasilkan AI dengan referensi data Polymarket. Ini bukan saran trading dan tidak berperan dalam bagaimana pasar ini diselesaikan. · Diperbarui

Hati-hati dengan link eksternal.
Hati-hati dengan link eksternal.
Pertanyaan yang Sering Diajukan