Congress returned from its summer recess last week to a slate of AI bills, including a proposed ban on developing superintelligent systems and a requirement that humans - not algorithms - make final decisions on health insurance claims. For insurance professionals, the legislation signals a shift toward mandating human accountability in automated coverage determinations.
A ban on superintelligent AI
The most aggressive proposal came from Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. His Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act would halt development of AI systems that surpass human intelligence and impose a temporary pause on other advanced AI deployment until a new federal regulator establishes safety guardrails. The bill would create a cabinet-level agency backed by an Artificial Intelligence Advisory Board of independent experts.
"The leaders of the major AI companies publicly acknowledge that they do not fully understand the technology and that it is escaping their control," Sanders said. "The future of humanity cannot be left in the hands of a handful of Big Tech oligarchs."
The measure carries unusually severe penalties. Companies continuing prohibited development could face a "corporate death penalty," terminating their legal existence. Individual violators could receive prison sentences of up to 20 years. It moves federal policy beyond voluntary commitments and transparency requirements, treating uncontrollable superintelligence as an activity too dangerous to permit.
OpenAI Chief Scientist Jakub Pachocki echoed the concern in a Sunday blog post titled "An Alien Mind," writing that he is "concerned no one is prepared for the consequences of a continued rapid rise in machine intelligence." The post arrived days after OpenAI released GPT-6 Astra, which the company called its most powerful model.
Reps. George Whitesides and Pat Harrigan introduced separate legislation directing the National Institute of Standards and Technology to monitor how advanced AI is used to conduct further AI research - targeting the risk of machines helping develop more capable machines.
Human review required for health insurance decisions
A bipartisan bill takes direct aim at AI for Insurance claims processing. The Doctors Not AI Act, introduced by Rep. Greg Landsman of Ohio, would prevent automated systems from having the final say on whether an insurer approves or denies a medical claim. AI could still play a supporting role, but denials based on medical necessity would require a licensed healthcare professional's decision.
"When a computer system is making decisions about healthcare, people will get hurt," Landsman said, warning that automated denials could leave patients with large bills, deteriorating health, or life-threatening consequences.
Insurers would also have to disclose their use of AI in claims processing to patients and administrative personnel. The bill includes protections intended to preserve access to mental healthcare. Co-introduced by Reps. Buddy Carter of Georgia, Kim Schrier of Washington, and Tom Barrett of Michigan, the proposal reflects growing legislative interest in human accountability for high-stakes automated decisions rather than an outright ban on the technology.
Oversight bills target defense and small business
Rep. Sara Jacobs proposed the Defense AI Reliability and Reporting Act, which would create a Pentagon-wide program and repository for reporting AI incidents and vulnerabilities. Jacobs said AI failures at the Defense Department could have deadly consequences or draw the United States into a war. Rep. Tony Wied introduced a bill directing the Small Business Administration to coordinate with CISA on cybersecurity guidance and with the Pentagon to help small federal contractors understand Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification requirements.
Why this matters for insurance professionals
The Doctors Not AI Act, if passed, would require claims denials based on medical necessity to carry a licensed professional's sign-off - not just an algorithmic determination. Insurers would need auditable processes showing where AI assisted and where a human made the final call. For claims adjusters, underwriters, and compliance teams, that means building or refining workflows that keep people in the decision chain. The disclosure requirement also means patient-facing communications would need to flag when AI was involved. The bill has bipartisan backing, making it one to watch as AI for Healthcare regulation takes shape.
Your membership also unlocks:
