This article, edited for length and context, was originally published on LinkedIn.

We need policies at the federal level that support entrepreneurs, startups and the broader AI ecosystem.  As we look forward to a future of AI transformation, it’s also instructive to look back a few decades to another period of world-changing technology innovation. In the 1990s, the Clinton administration saw the rapid rise of the Internet and online commerce. Like any significant new innovation, the Internet sparked excitement, but also dread and opposition. Headlines warned of everything from the destruction of established industries to the corruption of society through the spread of indecent content. 
 
President Clinton and his advisors did not succumb to fear. They recognized the extraordinary potential of a nation connected to the Internet and embraced a "light-touch" approach to regulation, allowing the Internet to flourish with minimal government intervention. This approach nurtured innovation, competition, and investment in the Internet, propelling the United States to become a global technology leader and igniting a digital revolution that profoundly reshaped society and the global economy. 
 
In contrast to Clinton's approach, the Biden Administration seems more focused on the potential harms of AI than its potential. Of course, the EO is not all bad, and there are elements that will serve the United States and our innovators and entrepreneurs well. 

The Positive  

• The EO acknowledges AI's potential to address pressing challenges and enhance our prosperity, productivity, innovation and security. It aims to establish a coherent framework for AI, recognizing the need to avoid overlapping efforts among government agencies.  
• Additionally, the Executive Order emphasizes the importance of attracting global talent to fuel ongoing U.S. economic growth and competitiveness, proposing changes that would boost high-skilled immigration. 

 The Concerning  

• The EO’s support for expanded Federal Trade Commission regulatory authority over the AI ecosystem could invite unwarranted interference with AI innovators and the nascent AI market. Given the current FTC chair's antipathy toward innovation and American business, empowering the FTC as America’s default AI regulator would be a significant mistake. 
• The EO leans toward a top-down control approach over existing industry initiatives. Despite the fact that leading AI companies have voluntarily agreed to AI safety protocols, the administration invokes the Korean War-era Defense Production Act to compel companies to notify the government about training activities and results before releasing products to the public. This approach, in the words of technologist Adam Thierer, risks confining AI innovators in a "regulatory cage" that requires permission to innovate.  
• The EO opens the door to regulations affecting all facets of AI use in healthcare, research, drug and device safety, delivery and financing. When combined, these new regulations could hinder smaller companies from developing AI-led tools in healthcare. 
• The top-down approach in the EO also extends to the development of government standards for cutting-edge AI models. This contrasts with the voluntary industry standards model that has propelled American firms to leadership in nearly every global technology sector. Voluntary standards are crafted by industry stakeholders who deeply understand the market's needs and consumer demands, and allow rapid adaptation to changes in technology, consumer preferences and market conditions.  

The greatest danger surrounding artificial intelligence isn’t fantastical scenarios like the rogue AI of Mission Impossible – it’s government mandates that could slow or even stop beneficial innovation.  
 
While excessive regulation is a challenge for all innovators, its burden will primarily fall on startups and small businesses. It can be particularly challenging for startups to navigate a complex regulatory landscape where cash-strapped entrepreneurs must hire compliance experts and legal counsel. Money spent on lawyers means fewer resources for research, development, hiring and growth. 
 
That means fewer devices and tools that can help us cure disease, make transportation safer or address pressing social issues. As the Biden administration moves forward with its AI plan, senior officials should draw inspiration from the dawn of the Internet era and recognize that a light-touch approach will best serve the United States. 

Learn more about the Executive Order on AI.