AI Super PACs Spent $79M on Midterms, Most Republican Candidates Backed by AI Industry Lost

AI Super PACs Deploy $79 Million in Midterm Elections

AI-focused political action committees spent $79 million across 68 House and Senate seats during the midterm elections, marking the technology industry's most significant attempt yet to shape federal AI policy4

4

. The spending came from two opposing camps: Leading the Future, which advocates for light AI regulation and a single national framework, and Public First, backed significantly by Anthropic, which pushes for stronger AI safety measures4

4

.

Leading the Future launched in August 2025 with approximately $100 million from Silicon Valley's biggest names, including Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, who each contributed $25 million, along with OpenAI President Greg Brockman3

3

4

4

. The network operates through structured arms catering to both parties: American Mission for Republicans and Think Big for Democrats1

1

.

Industry-Backed Candidates Face Significant Losses

The biggest setback for AI industry-backed groups came in South Carolina's Senate race, where two super PACs linked to Leading the Future spent $4.8 million supporting Republican Darline Graham, who lost to Democrat Annie Andrews1

1

4

4

. Graham earned the nickname "Data Center Darline" from her opponent due to her enthusiastic support of AI and data center expansion4

4

.

American Mission also spent more than $500,000 each supporting Republican House candidates Aaron Flint in Montana and Laurie Buckhout in North Carolina, both of whom lost their races1

1

. The Democratic arm Think Big had better success backing Florida Rep. Jared Moskowitz, who won reelection1

1

.

Leading the Future spent $27.38 million in the primaries, including $8 million opposing New York Assembly member Alex Bores in June1

1

. Public First countered with $15 million backing Bores, though he ultimately finished second to Micah Lasher, who also campaigned on AI safety3

3

.

AI Safety Advocates Claim Victory as Spending Becomes Political Liability

Charlie Blaettler, political director of Guardrails Alliance, which spent more than $1 million each opposing candidates who lost, suggested Leading the Future deliberately limited general election spending because "AI money" had become politically toxic1

1

. "Our goal is to make AI money politically toxic," Blaettler stated1

1

4

4

.

Brad Carson, co-founder of Public First Action, declared the midterms "a crushing blow to the AI industry's anti-regulatory efforts to buy a Congress that would look the other way"3

3

4

4

. The results came as voters rejected AI data centers in 40 of 41 ballot measures nationwide3

3

4

4

.

Scott Wiener's Win Signals Shift Toward Stricter AI Regulation

California State Sen. Scott Wiener won Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco congressional seat after receiving over $3 million from Public First Action2

2

. Wiener authored SB 1047, which would have become the first frontier AI legislation in the country before California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed it2

2

. He later sponsored SB 53, a lighter-touch bill that Newsom signed2

2

.

Wiener expressed concern about recursive self-improvement, citing a recent METR report on Anthropic as evidence that "we are quickly running out of time to regulate AI"2

2

. "We need to slow this down, because it's moving very quickly, and we could sleepwalk into a disaster," he said2

2

.

Wiener advocates for whistleblower protections, testing and auditing requirements, and a kill switch requirement for AI systems2

2

. He opposes broad federal preemption of state AI laws, arguing that "states are, as Brandeis says, laboratories"2

2

.

New Pro-Regulation Lawmakers Prepare for 2027

Beyond Wiener, several other AI safety advocates won congressional seats. Rep.-elect Manny Rutinel of Colorado sponsored various AI safety laws, including a first-in-the-nation law requiring "high-risk" AI developers to "use reasonable care to avoid algorithmic discrimination"5

5

. Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan released an AI policy platform calling for public ownership of frontier AI firms, going further than Sen. Bernie Sanders' proposal for a sovereign wealth fund5

5

.

The central debate between AI industry-backed groups and AI safety advocates centers on whether Congress should establish a national AI framework that overrides state laws, or whether states should maintain their ability to impose safeguards1

1

. Both sides plan to continue spending through the 2028 elections1

1

4

4

. Leading the Future ends the cycle with just over $20 million remaining3

3

4

4

, while Bores has launched a new nonprofit, Who Decides, aiming to raise $30 million before 20284

4

.