This year, Arizona lawmakers correctly took an important first step toward preparing students for a future with artificial intelligence. They shouldn’t let that effort end with a veto.

House Bill 4005, which passed the Arizona Legislature this session, would have introduced instruction on the ethical, moral and educational uses of AI for Arizona’s students in grades three, six, eight, ten and twelve. Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed the bill on June 19, arguing that charter schools should be held to the same standards as district schools and that curriculum should be developed by education experts rather than politicians.

Those are reasonable concerns. That is why lawmakers should return next session with a stronger version of HB4005 — one that addresses the governor’s objections while preserving the bill’s central mission of preparing Arizona students to use AI responsibly.

AI is already transforming how people learn, work and communicate. AI-powered tools are becoming commonplace in classrooms and workplaces, and today’s students will graduate into an economy where understanding these technologies will be as important as knowing how to use the internet today. Whether we embrace it or not, AI will become a permanent part of our lives.

That is why Arizona should teach students not only how to use AI, but also how to use it responsibly.

Responsible AI education does not just mean teaching students how to write effective prompts, but rather how to identify fabricated content, recognize bias in AI systems, evaluate AI-generated information critically, and appreciate the ethical consequences of relying on these tools. During my time as a Fulbright scholar studying educational policy, researchers and international bodies have made one lesson increasingly clear: AI literacy must include these ethical and civic dimensions. Arizona has an opportunity to become a national leader in preparing students for this new reality.

There is also a compelling economic reason to act. AI is reshaping industries across Arizona. Employers increasingly expect workers to understand AI and use it productively. Students who graduate with AI literacy will be better prepared to compete in a rapidly changing economy, while those who lack these skills risk falling behind before their careers even begin.

Fortunately, the governor’s objections are not difficult to address.

First, a revised version of HB4005 should once again include charter schools. Hobbs correctly noted that charter schools receiving public funding should meet Arizona’s academic standards. Excluding them from the AI instruction requirement created an unnecessary inconsistency. The original version of the bill included charter schools before later amendments removed them. Restoring that language would ensure that all publicly funded students receive the same preparation for an AI-driven future.

Second, lawmakers should broaden who develops the curriculum. In her veto, Hobbs argued that the curriculum should be written by experts rather than politicians. To be fair to the Legislature, that characterization overlooks how the bill was already structured. HB4005 established criteria for a university school, not politicians, to develop the curriculum. Those criteria appear to point to Arizona State University’s School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership.

Still, this is an opportunity to improve the legislation further. Rather than effectively designating a single school, lawmakers should authorize a broader collaboration among Arizona’s universities and academic experts. For instance, Arizona State University’s School for the Future of Innovation in Society, together with faculty in computer science, education, ethics, and related disciplines across the state, could develop a curriculum that reflects both the technical realities of AI and the ethical questions it raises. Such an approach would strengthen the bill while addressing the governor’s desire for expert-led curriculum development.

Arizona’s students will graduate into a world where AI is increasingly woven into professional and civic life. The longer we wait to teach them how to use it responsibly, the greater the disservice we do to the next generation.

Lawmakers took an important first step this year. Next session, they should finish the job.

Conner Huey was a Fulbright scholar at the University of Groningen where he focused on education policy.