Meeting Public Comments

Names and comments are public records. Remaining information is considered a confidential record.

Comments Submitted:

02-03-2026

Lori Stiles [N/A]

Comparing HSB 643 to the AI Bill SF2166: SF2166 is stronger bill with less vagueness, which makes SF2166 more effective, defensible and able to be implemented and 'policed'. The goal of both is admirable and necessary: Protecting Iowa Voters from deceptive AIgenerated synthetic media (specifically in campaigns, but IMO, something that is also needed in general). It appears SSB3039 (which has passed out of Subcommittee on Jan. 21, 2026) also attempts to address this issue, but SF2166 seems to be superior to even SSB3039. I am suggesting that amendments be made to HSB 643 to align it with SF2166 to make it a 'stronger', more targetted Bill that can actually be enforced, yet not infringe, unintentionally, on the right to free speech. Thank you.

02-04-2026

Thomas McInerney

I respectfully encourage members of the subcommittee to offer or support amendments to HSB 643 to align it with Senator Salmons SF 2166. Adopting these stronger Senate provisions would enhance the bills ability to protect Iowa voters from genuine deepfake risks while safeguarding free speech, minimizing vagueness concerns, and reducing the potential for First Amendment challenges. I also suggest including an amendment to the Board rulemaking provision to improve oversight and adaptability. An example of language could include a public comment period of at least 30 days prior to adopting or amending rules and to conduct an annual review of such rules to account for advancements in artificial intelligence. Thank you for your service and for considering these suggestions as the subcommittee reviews HSB 643. Aligning the House version with SF 2166 would position Iowa as a model for balanced, effective regulation of synthetic media in elections.

Attachment