Political factions both in favor of and against the artificial intelligence sector invested millions of dollars in an effort to sway the midterm elections held on Tuesday and to influence the future of AI regulation. The outcomes of this financial outlay were mixed, with several of the most heavily funded candidates experiencing defeats in their respective races.
On the side of the industry, two political action committees (PACs) focused on AI—American Mission and Building the Future—collectively allocated $4.8 million to support South Carolina Senate candidate Darline Graham, who ultimately lost. American Mission serves as the Republican funding arm of Leading the Future (LTF), a larger political organization backed by OpenAI president Greg Brockman and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. Additionally, American Mission invested over $500,000 each in support of Republican House candidates Aaron Flint in Montana and Laurie Buckhout in North Carolina, both of whom also faced defeat.
Conversely, LTF’s Democratic funding counterpart, Think Big, achieved greater success by supporting Florida Representative Jared Moskowitz, who secured reelection. Advocacy groups pushing for enhanced AI regulations also experienced varied outcomes. Public First, which receives backing from Anthropic, supported several Republican candidates who lost through its affiliated PAC but found more success in backing Democratic contenders. The organization also contributed $3 million to a PAC supporting California state Senator Scott Wiener, who was leading in his race at the time of this report.
Meanwhile, the Guardrails Alliance, a group aiming to make financial contributions from AI companies politically disadvantageous, expended over $1 million opposing two candidates who lost: California Representative Jimmy Gomez and Aaron Flint from Montana. The group also allocated $300,000 to support Angela Gonzales-Torres, who triumphed over Gomez.
It remains challenging to disentangle the effects of AI-related expenditures from the broader Democratic momentum that characterized Tuesday’s elections. Elon Musk, who reportedly invested half a billion dollars to support Republican candidates during the midterms, also witnessed many of his chosen candidates lose. Indeed, LTF backed several candidates it believed were likely to win, only to see them defeated by Democratic opponents.
For LTF, however, the general election was not the primary focus. The organization informed hinews prior to Election Day that it considers primaries—the contests that determine each party’s nominee—a more effective allocation of its resources, as spending in these races can enhance name recognition and assist candidates in establishing AI policy agendas. LTF invested $27.38 million in the primaries, including $8 million specifically aimed at opposing New York Assembly member Alex Bores, who lost his congressional bid in June.
When evaluating the merits of entering a general election contest, LTF assesses the competitiveness of the race, the potential impact of its spending, and whether it should conserve its resources for future elections.
Charlie Blaettler, political director of Guardrails Alliance, offered an alternative perspective on why LTF allocated comparatively little in the general election. “They don’t want their money to become an issue in these elections,” he stated. He referenced the Michigan Senate primary election, where a pro-Israel lobbying organization known as AIPAC spent nearly $30 million supporting Democratic candidate Haley Stevens against Abdul El-Sayed. Stevens ultimately conceded the primary to El-Sayed, who went on to win the Senate seat.
“AIPAC became the story in that race,” Blaettler remarked. “We know people harbor negative sentiments towards AI billionaires. They are distrustful and disillusioned by the political spending and lobbying efforts of the tech industry. If they invest in a competitive race, they would simply become a significant liability for their candidates.”
The central contention among AI-related PACs, whether they advocate for the industry or for regulation, revolves around whether Congress should create a national AI framework that supersedes state laws, or if states should retain their authority to impose their own safeguards.
Neither faction appears willing to concede. LTF, which supports a unified national AI framework, informed hinews of its intention to continue funding efforts in the 2028 elections, while Guardrails Alliance expressed its commitment to opposing candidates endorsed by the AI industry. Blaettler noted that while LTF’s advertisements seldom address AI directly, instead concentrating on popular issues relevant to each candidate, Guardrails Alliance’s ads specifically highlight which candidates are receiving financial support from the AI sector.
“Our goal is to make AI money politically toxic,” Blaettler concluded.
