The push for Elon Musk to spearhead US AI policy is already beginning

Attempts to influence the policies of President-elect Donald Trump through Elon Musk have already begun. On Friday, the nonprofit AI advocacy group Americans for Responsible Innovation (ARI) launched a public petition asking Trump to name Musk his special adviser on artificial intelligence, saying he is well-positioned to protect U.S. leadership in the technology , while ensuring its protected implementation.

Musk has been a leading critic of OpenAI, a company he co-founded but has recently distanced himself from and made an adversary of. Shortly after its release, ChatGPT signed on to a letter calling for a moratorium on the development of more advanced generative AI models to implement security. But critics say his stance is largely self-serving because he also runs his own artificial intelligence company, xAI.

ARI’s petition claims it is possible to deal with Musk’s conflicts of interest, arguing that with “appropriate mechanisms” to do so, “Musk would be an invaluable asset in helping the Trump administration lead the development of this transformative technology.” ARI intends to collect 10,000 signatures on the petition.

“Musk may prove to be an advocate for AI security in government,” wrote ARI policy analyst David Robusto in a recent blog post. Robusto pointed to Musk’s co-founding of OpenAI, his call for a moratorium on AI development, and his support for California’s vetoed SB 1047 AI security bill as reasons to believe his commitment to security runs deep. Robusto acknowledges that Musk hasn’t said much about what government policies should actually be implemented – beyond creating a dedicated AI safety agency – but says his “lack of specificity suggests that his thinking on this topic is evolving and can still be shape them in the public debate on this topic.”

Musk has previously said he would join the Trump administration in a role he created from scratch: head of the new Department of Government Effectiveness (DOGE), whose role will be to gut the entire US regulatory system. However, Robusto hopes that it will be able to promote AI safety even in this capacity – if only by less impact on the departments that manage it. Robusto argues that Musk could spare agencies key to AI security policy, such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), cuts in federal spending. And if Musk imposes mass layoffs across the government to save costs, the government may rely more heavily on artificial intelligence tools to make up for the workload.

“With the right guardrails, his unique combination of technical expertise and safety advocacy can be a valuable asset in developing responsible AI governance,” Robusto writes.