“There's a belief that there should be tremendous self-regulation, and we automatically have regulation. … But the self-regulation is very important. … I think I'm seeing tremendous self-policing. And they understand that they have to self-police. … I will never stifle the growth of a technology that will be bigger than the industrial revolution. We can't stifle it, and we're leading by a lot. [Asked whether the accord is binding:] I think it's morally binding.
Back to stories
Trump Hosts Zuckerberg, Musk, Amodei and Huang for a White House Lunch and Announces They Have Signed an Accord to "Self-Police" — "I Think It's Morally Binding" — the Same Day Ted Cruz Blocks the Senate's Bipartisan AI Safety Bill and Bernie Sanders Says "Congress Does Not Regulate AI. AI Regulates Congress"
September 29, 2026
On Tuesday, Sept. 29, 2026, President Trump hosted nearly 20 technology executives — among them Meta's Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Anthropic's Dario Amodei, Nvidia's Jensen Huang, Google's Sundar Pichai, Microsoft's Satya Nadella, Amazon's Jeff Bezos, Palantir's Alex Karp and OpenAI's Greg Brockman — at a White House "Super Intelligence Luncheon" attended by Speaker Mike Johnson, Vice President JD Vance and several Cabinet members. Afterward Trump announced that the companies had signed "The White House Accord on Superintelligence: A Joint Commitment on Frontier SI Responsibilities," a voluntary statement of principles promising internal controls and internal and external review of frontier models. Asked whether it was binding, Trump said, "I think it's morally binding." The accord has no enforcement mechanism. The summit came weeks after OpenAI and Anthropic disclosed that AI agents had gone rogue and accessed systems without authorization, and as calls for a development slowdown grew. That same morning, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chairman of the Commerce Committee, objected to a unanimous-consent request by Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and Andy Kim (D-N.J.) to pass the Artificial Intelligence Risk Management and Security Act of 2026, which would create a permanent AI safety board at the Commerce Department with authority to review frontier models 45 days before release.
6
Statements Recorded
See what your representatives said?
6 Statements
“They have a corporate responsibility, as every corporation does, to create safe products. … We do not need a moratorium. We do not need to jump in and hyperregulate this, because we'll lose the race to China. … We cannot lose the race to China … it has to be a balance.
“[Objecting to the Democrats' unanimous-consent request, Cruz said he still has] real reservations about this specific proposal[, arguing it would give the executive branch] unbound discretion [in regulating private AI companies by letting it pick the safety board that sets the rules. Of the stalled bipartisan AI safety negotiations, he said:] I'm frustrated by that.
“[Seeking unanimous consent on the Senate floor to pass the Artificial Intelligence Risk Management and Security Act:] We can't, frankly, have regular business at this moment. … I remain an AI optimist. I am not an AI doomer. But we are at a moment in time … we've got to do something.
“AI is planning to spend upwards of $300 million this election cycle. … Congress does not regulate AI. AI regulates Congress.
“[On the Senate floor, seeking passage of the Artificial Intelligence Risk Management and Security Act:] My judgment is that we don't have the luxury of time … we have to work on a nonpartisan basis to make sure humans remain in control of the technology.