Human-AI Collaboration in Government

A claims examiner opens a file the machine has already read, assembled, and summarized; her day’s work now begins at judgment, and her name is on the decision. That office is the argument. The question facing government AI has changed from whether to on what terms, and this article makes the case for augmentation with accountable humans in command over both replacement and refusal. Grounded in the VA’s claims workflows, the deepest concentration of high-impact AI in government, it answers the automation-bias objection with measurable design, monitored override rates, blind-review sampling, and trained reviewers, and presses the doctrine’s moral root: a decision the citizen cannot appeal to a responsible official is a decision improperly made.