The New York skyline, a backdrop to the growing influence of the AI industry in political arenas. (Illustrative AI-generated image).
The $20 Million Primary: A New Record in AI Political Spending
In a single Democratic primary race in New York, the artificial intelligence industry spent $20 million. This is a staggering amount of money for any primary election, exceeding the spending of many oil and pharmaceutical companies on entire congressional races.
To put this in context, $20 million is roughly the same amount the entire pharmaceutical industry spent on all federal elections in 2020. It is also more than the oil and gas industry spent on targeted House races in the 2022 midterms. This New York primary has become the most expensive test of AI industry influence in American politics to date.
What began as a routine Democratic primary turned into a referendum on how strictly the U.S. government should regulate artificial intelligence. The AI industry made it clear it was willing to spend significantly to achieve its preferred outcome.
Political action committees (PACs) backed by major AI companies and their investors flooded local TV, social media, and mailboxes with advertisements. They also hired numerous campaign staff. The clear objective was to defeat any candidate advocating for stringent AI regulation.
By the election’s end, the industry had spent more money per voter than any other interest group in recent memory. And they were successful.
Alex Bores’s Defeat: A Signal for AI Regulation Advocates
Alex Bores, a candidate for a New York State Assembly seat, ran on a platform advocating for careful yet serious oversight of AI technology. He proposed new rules to prevent AI from spreading misinformation, replacing human workers without safeguards, and violating privacy.
Bores was not an outsider; he had support from labor unions, consumer advocacy groups, and tech experts concerned about the risks of unregulated AI. He argued that the U.S. should follow Europe’s lead in enacting strict AI laws.
The AI industry opposed Bores’s stance and poured money into the primary to ensure his defeat, which they achieved. Bores’s loss in this race garnered national attention.
The New York Times reported that Bores’s defeat highlighted a new reality: “The AI industry can now buy a primary election.” This sends a strong message to any politician considering strong AI regulation.
His loss signals to other candidates nationwide that opposing the AI industry could lead to a costly campaign to end their political careers. This situation extends beyond a single New York candidate; it impacts who decides the future of AI regulation in the United States.
The Washington Post characterized the New York race as “the first front in the AI industry’s midterm war,” indicating this spending is the beginning of a larger campaign to influence political outcomes across the country.
The AI Industry’s Political Strategy: Light-Touch Regulation
The AI industry’s political strategy, though nascent, is becoming evident. The industry’s primary goal is to avoid heavy regulation, favoring instead light-touch rules that allow for rapid AI development without significant government restrictions.
Key proposals the industry is actively opposing include mandatory safety testing before releasing new AI models, requirements for disclosing AI-generated content, and laws holding AI companies liable for damages caused by their technology. These are similar to the regulations already established in Europe with its AI Act.
The industry’s strategy involves three core components: targeting primary races with outspoken pro-regulation candidates, overwhelming them with financial resources, and creating a chilling effect to encourage other candidates to remain silent or adopt pro-industry stances.
This approach mirrors tactics used by the oil industry in the 1990s and the pharmaceutical industry in the 2000s. However, the AI industry’s speed and scale are notable, quickly establishing itself as a major player in campaign finance.
Funding for these efforts comes from established companies like OpenAI and Google, as well as venture capital-backed startups. Many investors view AI as a trillion-dollar industry and are willing to spend substantially to prevent regulations from hindering growth.
CNBC reported that AI PACs involved in the New York race not only funded advertisements but also made direct contributions to supportive candidates, conducted opposition research, and executed sophisticated digital advertising campaigns targeting specific voter demographics.
The industry is also recruiting experienced political operatives. This indicates a move beyond simple financial contributions to building a sustained political operation.
Implications of the New York Race for AI Regulation
The New York race serves as a clear warning to proponents of strict AI regulation, demonstrating the industry’s willingness to aggressively defend its interests through significant financial investment.
However, the outcome also revealed voter concerns about AI’s impact on jobs and misinformation, indicating a public desire for action. The challenge lies in defining the nature of that action.
The winning candidate, who was more industry-friendly, did not oppose all regulation but advocated for “balanced” rules that support innovation while addressing risks. This message resonated with voters.
This suggests the AI industry’s aim is not solely to block regulation but to actively shape its form, ensuring its perspective is considered in policy-making.
For Democrats, this presents a dilemma. While the party has expressed intentions to regulate AI, as seen in President Biden’s 2023 executive order on AI safety, the industry’s substantial spending creates pressure to moderate their stance.
Some Democratic strategists fear that aggressive regulatory pushes could alienate the AI industry, potentially leading to a loss of campaign funding and the industry’s support for Republican candidates who promise deregulation.
The New York primary demonstrated the industry’s capacity to influence Democratic primaries, not just general elections, thereby shaping the party’s candidates.
National Stakes: AI Policy and Party Politics
The national implications of this AI industry political spending are substantial, as AI is poised to reshape the economy, workforce, and democratic processes. The nature of AI regulation will significantly influence this transformation.
Democrats generally favor more comprehensive AI regulation, including safety standards, worker protections, and measures against bias. Yahoo News highlighted how Democrats’ ambitious AI plans were contingent on outcomes like the New York primary.
However, Alex Bores’s defeat suggests that Democrats might need to temper their regulatory approach if pro-regulation candidates consistently lose primaries.
Republicans are more divided on AI regulation. Some advocate for minimal government intervention, believing market forces will address risks, while others support rules focused on national security and competition with China. Most Republicans view AI as a driver of economic growth and are hesitant to impose heavy regulations.
This creates a natural alignment between many Republicans and the AI industry. Simultaneously, the industry must prevent Democrats from enacting overly strict regulations, necessitating spending across the political spectrum.
While the New York race was a Democratic primary, similar AI PAC spending is anticipated in Republican primaries. Any candidate, regardless of party, who champions strong AI regulation could face significant opposition funded by the AI industry.
AI PACs are reportedly already identifying potential targets for the 2026 midterms, focusing on races where AI regulation is a prominent issue for incumbents or challengers, according to The Washington Post.
Tracking AI PAC Spending: The Money Trail
Precisely tracing the origins of AI industry political funding can be challenging due to disclosure timelines. However, available information provides a clear picture of the major players.
Leading AI PACs receive funding from prominent industry figures and companies. OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, has been particularly active, with CEO Sam Altman making personal donations and the company supporting PACs like “AI for America” which finances extensive advertising.
Major tech firms such as Google, Microsoft, and Meta have increased their political contributions related to AI. Venture capital firms like Sequoia Capital and Andreessen Horowitz, with significant investments in AI startups, are also involved, viewing regulation as a potential threat to their portfolios.
The $20 million spent in the New York primary alone surpasses the total federal election spending of some industries, like oil and gas ($15 million in 2020) and nearly matches the pharmaceutical industry’s ($25 million in 2020). This level of spending in a single primary is extraordinary.
A substantial portion of this funding was allocated to television advertisements that ran extensively before the election. These ads often warned that pro-regulation candidates would “kill jobs” and “stifle innovation,” framing regulation as detrimental to the public.
The remaining funds supported mailers, digital ads, and get-out-the-vote efforts, including payments to campaign consultants, indicating a comprehensive and meticulously planned approach.
This level of spending raises significant questions about campaign finance reform. While the Supreme Court protects political spending as free speech, critics argue that unlimited corporate and donor spending can overshadow the voices of average voters.
The AI industry’s political spending is expected to grow as AI’s economic importance increases, leading to a greater demand for political influence. The New York race is likely just the beginning of this trend.
The Midterm War: AI Industry’s Next Moves
With
