Legislative committee hears proposals to regulate AI chatbots
By Fred Knapp 
, Senior Reporter/Producer Nebraska Public Media
Feb. 9, 2026, 6 p.m. ·
Listen To This Story
A legislative committee heard proposals Monday to require AI chatbots disclose they are not human, and to require companies to disclose safety plans to regulate them. Plus, there was an example of compromise between two senators often at odds.
Sen. Eliot Bostar is the sponsor of legislation (LB1185) that would require providers of conversational artificial intelligence, or AI services, to disclose to users under 18 that they are not human. Such disclosures would have to be made at the start of each session and at least every three hours after that. Providers would also be required to avoid providing sexual content or simulating romantic relationships. And if users talk about self-harm or suicide, providers would have to make “reasonable efforts” to refer them to suicide hotlines or other appropriate services.
Among those supporting the bill in the hearing before the Banking, Commerce and Insurance Committee was author Mary Pipher, a clinical psychologist and author of Letters to a Young Therapist. Pipher reflected on changes in society since 2004.
“Social media was really just getting started. Cell phones came in in 2007 so the changes between 2004 and 2016 were significant. But since 2016 till now, we've had the rise of AI and chatbots. We've had the COVID pandemic, and we've had a rapidly changing culture that presents all of us with unique challenges that humans have never faced before,” Pipher said.
Support also came from representatives of Google and from Emily Allen of Tech Nebraska, part of the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Allen said the bill takes a reasonable approach.
“We view this bill as a constructive starting point for what we often call smart regulation, policy that protects people while still allowing innovation to move forward,” Allen said. "Tech and in this case, AI, is evolving faster than any legislative body can realistically keep pace with. That being said, this bill reflects a good faith effort to put reasonable guardrails in place."
No one spoke against the bill.
The committee also heard another bill (LB1083), which would require large chatbot developers or providers to take measures to protect public safety and children, and disclose how they assess and manage such risks.
Sen. Tanya Storer, lead sponsor of the bill, said it is in response to incidents like the suicide of a California teenager warned by an AI chatbot against seeking help and instructed on how to tie a noose. Storer also cited reports of AI systems being used to generate instructions on how to build dangerous weapons and to generate cyberattacks. And she pushed back against anticipated opposition to her bill.
“LB1083 does not tell AI companies what to build or how they can build it," she said. "It does not ban any technology. It does not impose specific technical requirements. There is no way of developing AI that it prohibits. What it does is require the largest AI developers and chat bot providers to tell us how they are managing these risks, to write down their safety plans, publish those plans and report safety incidents to the Attorney General."
No one spoke against the bill during the hearing. But in an online comment, Luisa Smith of Tech Nebraska expressed opposition. Smith said her organization shares the legislation’s goals of promoting safety, but is concerned its “overly broad” regulatory mechanisms could conflict with federal efforts. She also said the bill gives the attorney general power to change definitions, in possible violation of the separation of powers. The committee took no immediate action on the bills.
During debate by the full Legislature on Monday, senators saw an example of compromise between two of them who are often at odds. The issue was Sen. Mike Moser’s bill (LB397) to do away with a requirement for companies to have safety committees. Moser says the requirement hasn’t been funded for over 20 years, and safety is covered by grants from the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA. Critics of his bill say OSHA does not cover public employees.
Monday, Sen. John Cavanaugh met with Moser and representatives of the state Department of Labor to work out a compromise that kept the requirement of safety committees for public employees and said it could be negotiated as part of collective bargaining.
Moser, a conservative Republican in the officially nonpartisan Legislature, endorsed the proposal by Cavanaugh, a progressive Democrat.
“Better write this down. I'm recommending that you vote for a Cavanaugh amendment,” Moser said.
Cavanaugh agreed about the unusual event.
“Thank you, Senator Moser. It is an auspicious day,” he said.
And Sen. George Dungan said that’s how the system is meant to work.
“For those who sometimes wonder why we're debating and why we're having the back and forth, that's exactly why, because it gives time for these conversations to happen and people can work on amendments to come to some consensus,” Dungan said.
Cavanaugh’s amendment was adopted, 38-1, and the bill then got second round approval on a vote of 42-0.
More from the Unicameral:
Harassment allegation against senator derails antisemitism bill in Nebraska Legislature
Legislature passes minimum wage decrease for teen workers
High school sports bills would allow middle schoolers to compete; regulate name, image and likeness
Senator proposes legislation to change Nebraska’s school funding formula