AI giants spend $16 million to shape Manhattan primary as regulation debate intensifies

The A.I. Proxy Fight Roiling the Race for a New York House Seat

Groups tied to OpenAI, Anthropic and other industry players have spent $16 million trying to pick the next member of Congress from Manhattan. Super PACs tied to the nation's leading artificial intelligence giants have transformed the closing weeks of a race for a coveted New York City House seat by unleashing staggering amounts of money to shape its outcome and a national debate over regulating the industry. Together, groups linked to the Silicon Valley rivals OpenAI and Anthropic have already spent more than $12 million stuffing mailboxes and blanketing TV screens with costly broadcast ads -- including during the Knicks N.B.A. finals games. Other groups with ties to industry players have chipped in another $4 million, and more spending is expected soon. With less than two weeks before the June 23 Democratic primary, the A.I.-related expenditures -- alongside an unrelated $10 million infusion by former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg -- could end up making the contest in Manhattan one of the most expensive in congressional history. And all of it is most likely a preview of an even bigger battle to come in the midterms this fall, when groups tied to leading technology companies have pledged to spend hundreds of millions of dollars around elections that could determine whether Congress pursues new guardrails for the industry. "It's a real test of whether corporate interests from California, from A.I., from crypto can control an election," said Representative Jerrold Nadler, the liberal Democrat whose retirement from the New York House seat has prompted this spending spree in the race to replace him. "I hate to see that happening here," he added. Interest groups and wealthy individuals have played an ever larger role in elections for years, since the Supreme Court got rid of limits on how much super PACs can raise and spend. Mr. Bloomberg, for example, has been one of the largest single funders, and his current spending will help a former aide in the race, Assemblyman Micah Lasher. But the skirmish now playing out in the heart of Manhattan may be instructive of how quickly and thoroughly the new A.I. combatants can shape a political race, given the vast sums of money to be made. The proxy fight began when a super PAC connected to OpenAI and other industry players generally opposed to greater government regulation singled out Assemblyman Alex Bores, one of the half-dozen candidates competing to replace Mr. Nadler. Mr. Bores had helped write a law seeking to regulate advanced artificial intelligence models in New York. But the terrain has rapidly become more complex. Rather than sink Mr. Bores, 35, the attacks inadvertently helped elevate the little-known lawmaker into a front-runner. In the months since, other entities tied to OpenAI's main rival, Anthropic, as well as other tech donors in favor of greater regulation, have generously come to his aid with their own millions of dollars. By Thursday, spending in favor of Mr. Bores's candidacy by industry players had actually narrowly exceeded spending against him from such groups, according to federal records. And that was without accounting for Nuestro PAC, which began burning another $2 million attacking Mr. Lasher, according to the records. (The group denies directly accepting the crypto of A.I. industry money, but has past ties to Silicon Valley players and has not disclosed its recent donors.) Polls show Mr. Bores and Mr. Lasher, who is Mr. Nadler's choice to succeed him, in a statistical dead heat. They are followed by Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of John F. Kennedy; George T. Conway III, the anti-Trump commentator; and Nina Schwalbe, a global vaccine expert. The winner of the primary is expected to be a shoo-in in November to represent a remarkable district that is home to Broadway, Central Park, the Democratic donor class and more Fortune 500 companies than any other. For months, the race had centered on which candidate was best equipped to check President Trump, strategies to bring down soaring housings costs and the United States' relationship with Israel. But the crush of outside attacks and counterattacks have thrust thorny questions about corporate influence, political power and the rapidly evolving technology of artificial intelligence itself onto the campaign trail. It has left many voters struggling to sort through them at a time when anxieties -- and optimism -- over A.I. disruption are already soaring. Mr. Bores has sought to use the initial attacks to present himself as a crusading tech reformer who is being punished for standing up to "Trump megadonors" behind $6.5 million in attacks from Leading the Future and Think Big, the OpenAI linked groups. His A.I. positions have helped attract support from labor unions and progressive groups. Josh Vlasto, the groups' top strategist, has argued that Mr. Bores's plans would choke American innovation and said his group had been motivated to spend because it believed Anthropic and its allies would find a way to put millions of dollars behind Mr. Bores. But the groups, which favor fewer federal interventions than their rival, have expanded their attacks beyond Mr. Bores's regulatory proposals. In a prominent example, they attacked his work for Palantir, a technology company "powering ICE," as a narrator puts it in an ad. Palantir, which has contracted with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, has become toxic among many Democrats. Mr. Bores says he left the company in 2019, in part over concerns about its immigration work. (Ironically, the OpenAI PACs count a co-founder of Palantir among their biggest donors.) Mr. Bores's fellow candidates have watched all of it with mounting frustration. Most say they, too, want more regulation on the new technology, and argue that his underdog narrative is misleading now that a trio of tech-backed groups have stepped in to burnish his image. The dynamic was on full display in a pair of debates this week. Asked about the super PAC blitz, Mr. Bores said that he was the victim of powerful groups "sending a message that no one should regulate A.I. or you will become a big target." Like other candidates in the race, he said he would favor outlawing the outside spending. "All of my opponents are benefiting from that spending," he said during one of the debates, hosted by the local news site Courier. Laura Dunn, another candidate, pushed back, arguing that Anthropic's support meant Mr. Bores was less of crusader against tech influence than a partisan in a corporate battle for influence. "We will not have proper regulation as long as we keep accepting corporate funders," she said. At another point, Mr. Bores suggested that "every candidate on this stage has a super PAC," drawing sharp pushback from his rivals. "That's not true," interjected Mr. Schlossberg, who has labeled himself "No PAC Jack" to highlight his opposition to big money influencing politics. Others piled on. "I would love to hear about my super PAC," Ms. Schwalbe said ironically. (She, like Mr. Schlossberg, Ms. Dunn and Mr. Conway do not have super PACs supporting them.) Mr. Bores clarified that he meant that his rivals were being indirectly helped because Leading the Future was spending so much to attack him. The group has not taken positions on any other candidate. "That is actually OpenAI's super PAC that is mad at you because you have an Anthropic super PAC," Mr. Schlossberg shot back. "It has nothing to do with me. You cannot lie your way out of this." Mr. Lasher has sustained his own criticism for accepting support from Mr. Bloomberg's super PAC. During the debate, though, he raised questions about one of the pro-Bores PACs, in this case funded by the billionaire cryptocurrency executive Chris Larsen. While the donor has said he was spending because he found OpenAI's attacks "really despicable," Mr. Lasher pointed out that Mr. Bores had also proactively sought support from the crypto industry, where Mr. Larsen made his fortune. After more debate, Mr. Bores accused his opponents of missing the bigger picture. "We are going to lose to the A.I. industry if people keep playing these petty games," he said. "A.I. is coming for all of us."

A Kennedy, Kellyanne Conway's ex-husband and a former Palantir data scientist debated AI regulation. Welcome to the Manhattan primary | Fortune

Democrats competing over a coveted congressional district in Manhattan slugged it out during a heated debate Thursday night, sparring over big tech and who would be President Donald Trump's toughest foe. But it was Alex Bores -- a state lawmaker whose plans to regulate artificial intelligence has led to a flurry of industry spending both against and in support of him -- who was the prime target. Within moments, state Assembly Member Micah Lasher suggested Bores would be beholden to the big tech players who support his campaign. "Alex only wants to tell you half the story, about one AI company that's spending millions to defeat him, and that's bad," Lasher said. "But he's not telling you the story about Anthropic, which is spending a million dollars to elect him, or a crypto billionaire who is spending $3.5 million to send him to Congress," Lasher continued. Soon after, Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of former President John F. Kennedy, made a similar claim, arguing that Bores' proposed artificial intelligence regulation "is a dream come true" for tech companies because it would give them too much control. Bores responded: "With friends like these, who needs Republicans?" "The Trump disinformation is coming from inside the party," said Bores, a former data scientist at the tech firm Palantir who says he quit after it signed a deal to help the first Trump administration with immigration enforcement. The debate, hosted by local cable channel PIX11, came with just weeks to go before the June 23 primary for the District 12 congressional seat soon to vacated by retiring U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler. The district includes the upscale neighborhoods bordering Central Park and Times Square in Midtown Manhattan. It is considered safely Democratic, with the Democratic primary regarded as the race's deciding contest. Nadler's retirement announcement resulted in a wave of Democrats launching campaigns, though the ranks of challengers have somewhat thinned. Nadler has endorsed Lasher, a former staffer who has held several behind-the-scenes posts in New York government before becoming a lawmaker in the state Assembly. Schlossberg, whose zany social media antics and Kennedy lineage brought national eyes to the race, has cast himself as an fresh face to a party searching for stars during Trump's second term. George Conway, who was once married to former Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway before becoming a leading antagonist of the president, is running a campaign centered on removing Trump from office. Bores entered the race without the fanfare of a Kennedy or a Conway but has since become a major player after an artificial intelligence-aligned group started spending to hobble his campaign. The spending has seemed to elevate his campaign, rather than damage him, helping Bores frame himself as the candidate who wants to regulate a technology that has unnerved many Americans worried about impacts such as job losses. Throughout the debate, Bores, who sponsored state legislation to require major AI developers to report dangerous incidents to the state, fended off attacks. After one tense exchange, he moved to respond but was cut short so the broadcast could take a commercial break. Three of the five commercials were about Bores, a signal of the glut of spending in the race. The first ad, paid for by the AI-backed Think Big PAC, claimed Bores was "bought and sold" by corporate interests. The following two ads were supportive of Bores, with one featuring a robotic voice that identified itself as "the AI super PAC funded by Trump's megadonors designed to destroy Alex Bores," and the other casting Bores as a champion of the working class. "You've seen tonight that I'm nothing like the incessant text and mailers and TV ads that are being sent out to demonize me. But I am terrifying to Trump's megadonors and apparently to my opponents as well," Bores said when the debate resumed. Conway, meanwhile, lamented the combative nature of the night. "What we saw here tonight was something that Democrats sometimes do a little too well, which was a circular, or really a triangular firing squad, and I think that's a shame," he said.

Democrats Spar Over Big Tech During Debate for Coveted Congressional District in Manhattan

NEW YORK (AP) -- Democrats competing over a coveted congressional district in Manhattan slugged it out during a heated debate Thursday night, sparring over big tech and who would be President Donald Trump's toughest foe. But it was Alex Bores -- a state lawmaker whose plans to regulate artificial intelligence has led to a flurry of industry spending both against and in support of him -- who was the prime target. Within moments, state Assembly Member Micah Lasher suggested Bores would be beholden to the big tech players who support his campaign. "Alex only wants to tell you half the story, about one AI company that's spending millions to defeat him, and that's bad," Lasher said. "But he's not telling you the story about Anthropic, which is spending a million dollars to elect him, or a crypto billionaire who is spending $3.5 million to send him to Congress," Lasher continued. Soon after, Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of former President John F. Kennedy, made a similar claim, arguing that Bores' proposed artificial intelligence regulation "is a dream come true" for tech companies because it would give them too much control. Bores responded: "With friends like these, who needs Republicans?" "The Trump disinformation is coming from inside the party," said Bores, a former data scientist at the tech firm Palantir who says he quit after it signed a deal to help the first Trump administration with immigration enforcement. The debate, hosted by local cable channel PIX11, came with just weeks to go before the June 23 primary for the District 12 congressional seat soon to vacated by retiring U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler. The district includes the upscale neighborhoods bordering Central Park and Times Square in Midtown Manhattan. It is considered safely Democratic, with the Democratic primary regarded as the race's deciding contest. Nadler's retirement announcement resulted in a wave of Democrats launching campaigns, though the ranks of challengers have somewhat thinned. Nadler has endorsed Lasher, a former staffer who has held several behind-the-scenes posts in New York government before becoming a lawmaker in the state Assembly. Schlossberg, whose zany social media antics and Kennedy lineage brought national eyes to the race, has cast himself as an fresh face to a party searching for stars during Trump's second term. George Conway, who was once married to former Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway before becoming a leading antagonist of the president, is running a campaign centered on removing Trump from office. Bores entered the race without the fanfare of a Kennedy or a Conway but has since become a major player after an artificial intelligence-aligned group started spending to hobble his campaign. The spending has seemed to elevate his campaign, rather than damage him, helping Bores frame himself as the candidate who wants to regulate a technology that has unnerved many Americans worried about impacts such as job losses. Throughout the debate, Bores, who sponsored state legislation to require major AI developers to report dangerous incidents to the state, fended off attacks. After one tense exchange, he moved to respond but was cut short so the broadcast could take a commercial break. Three of the five commercials were about Bores, a signal of the glut of spending in the race. The first ad, paid for by the AI-backed Think Big PAC, claimed Bores was "bought and sold" by corporate interests. The following two ads were supportive of Bores, with one featuring a robotic voice that identified itself as "the AI super PAC funded by Trump's megadonors designed to destroy Alex Bores," and the other casting Bores as a champion of the working class. "You've seen tonight that I'm nothing like the incessant text and mailers and TV ads that are being sent out to demonize me. But I am terrifying to Trump's megadonors and apparently to my opponents as well," Bores said when the debate resumed. Conway, meanwhile, lamented the combative nature of the night. "What we saw here tonight was something that Democrats sometimes do a little too well, which was a circular, or really a triangular firing squad, and I think that's a shame," he said.