AI PACs spent millions on the midterms, with mixed results

Political groups on both sides of the AI debate spent millions of dollars trying to influence Tuesday's midterm elections and the future of AI regulation, and the returns were mixed. Some of the most heavily backed candidates lost their races while others backed with far less money won.

On the industry side, two AI-focused political action committees, American Mission and Building the Future, collectively 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 the venture firm Andreessen Horowitz.

American Mission also spent more than $500,000 apiece on Montana House candidate Aaron Flint and North Carolina's Laurie Buckhout, both of whom lost. LTF's Democratic spending arm, Think Big, had better luck with Florida Representative Jared Moskowitz, who won reelection.

Groups pushing for stronger AI safeguards fared no better overall. Public First, which is backed by Anthropic, supported several Republicans who lost through its affiliated PAC but had more success with Democratic candidates. It also contributed $3 million to a PAC supporting California state Senator Scott Wiener, who was leading his race at the time of publication.

Guardrails Alliance, which has tried to make taking money from AI companies a political liability, spent more than $1 million apiece opposing California Representative Jimmy Gomez and Montana's Flint; both lost. It spent $300,000 supporting Angela Gonzales-Torres, who defeated Gomez.

It is difficult to separate the effect of AI spending from the broader Democratic wave that swept Tuesday's elections. Elon Musk, who reportedly put half a billion dollars behind Republicans, also saw many of his candidates lose. LTF was never focused on the general election: it told TechCrunch before Election Day that primaries are a better use of money because spending there builds name recognition and helps candidates set AI policy agendas. The group spent $27.38 million in the primaries, including $8 million opposing New York Assembly member Alex Bores, who lost his congressional bid in June.

The core dispute between the two camps is whether Congress should establish a national AI framework that overrides state laws, or whether states keep the ability to impose their own safeguards. LTF favours a single national framework and says it will keep spending in 2028, while Guardrails Alliance says it will keep opposing industry-backed candidates. 'Our goal is to make AI money politically toxic,' said the group's political director, Charlie Blaettler.