AI-Focused Political Groups Post Mixed Results in US Midterm Elections
Groups both backing and opposing the AI industry spent millions of dollars in the US midterm elections. Several of the most heavily backed candidates lost.
Political groups both supporting and opposing the artificial intelligence (AI) industry spent millions of dollars on Tuesday's US congressional midterm elections, hoping to sway results and the future of AI regulation. The outcomes were mixed, and some of the most heavily backed candidates lost.
Industry-aligned spending
Two AI-focused political action committees (PACs), American Mission and Building the Future, together spent $4.8 million backing South Carolina Senate candidate Darline Graham, who lost. American Mission is the Republican spending arm of Leading the Future (LTF), a group backed by OpenAI president Greg Brockman and venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. It also spent over $500,000 each on Republican House candidates Aaron Flint in Montana and Laurie Buckhout in North Carolina; both lost. LTF's Democratic arm, Think Big, fared better with Florida Rep. Jared Moskowitz, who was reelected.
Pro-regulation spending
Groups pushing for stronger AI safeguards also saw varied results. Public First, which is backed by Anthropic, supported several Republicans who lost through its affiliated PAC, but did better with Democratic candidates. It also gave $3 million to a PAC supporting California state Sen. Scott Wiener, who was leading his race at the time of publication. Guardrails Alliance, which aims to make taking AI-company money a political liability, spent more than $1 million each against California Rep. Jimmy Gomez and Flint; both lost. It also spent $300,000 backing Angela Gonzales-Torres, who defeated Gomez.
Primaries and the road ahead
The effect of AI-related spending is hard to separate from the broader Democratic wave in Tuesday's vote. LTF focused mainly on party primaries, where it spent $27.38 million, including $8 million against New York Assembly member Alex Bores, who lost his congressional bid in June. Charlie Blaettler, political director of Guardrails Alliance, argued LTF avoids heavy general-election spending because it does not want its money to become an issue.
The central dispute is whether Congress should set a national AI framework that overrides state laws. LTF, which favors a single national framework, plans to keep spending in the 2028 elections, while Guardrails Alliance says it will keep opposing candidates backed by the AI industry.
