AI political groups spend $78.5 million, with 74% going to primaries
Roughly $8 million has been deployed in general-election races, trailing the $6.9 million spent by rival groups favoring stricter regulations.
By Luka Evans ·
AI-aligned political committees reported spending approximately $78.5 million on federal candidates this cycle. According to an analysis of Federal Election Commission filings through Oct. 20, 74% of that total, or about $58 million, went toward primary contests. General-election spending has slowed considerably, with pro-development groups deploying $8 million and pro-regulation groups using $6.9 million in races heading into November.
The division has created direct conflicts in key districts. In Florida's 25th Congressional District, Jared Moskowitz and Scott Singer are competing in the general election after a contentious primary. Think Big, an affiliate of the Leading the Future network, spent $310,000 supporting Moskowitz. Defending Our Values, which favors stronger state-level guardrails, spent $857,000 to aid Singer and another $740,000 to block his primary opponent. This spending pattern illustrates a wider split over regulatory speed and state authority.
Pro-development groups are outspending their rivals in the current general-election phase. Leading the Future and its affiliated PACs have spent roughly $8 million in these races. Groups pushing for stricter safeguards have spent about $6.9 million. Bruce Freed, president of the Center for Political Accountability, noted that money is flowing in multiple directions as both sides compete for control of the legislative agenda. He described the situation as a debate over the extent of necessary regulation rather than a disagreement on whether regulation is needed at all.
The current spending model mirrors the strategy used by cryptocurrency advocates in 2024. Fairshake and its affiliated super PACs spent more than $130 million in the previous cycle, supporting candidates who won 53 of 58 races. AI investors adopted this approach in August 2025 when Leading the Future launched with over $100 million in commitments. Donors included Andreessen Horowitz, Greg Brockman, and Joe Lonsdale. The network deployed Think Big for Democrats and American Mission for Republicans to support candidates aligned with faster AI deployment and uniform federal rules.
Rival infrastructure emerged to counter this spending. Anthropic committed $40 million to Public First Action, a group advocating for stronger safety measures. Super PACs tied to this network have spent millions to advance similar priorities. A major clash occurred in New York's 12th District Democratic primary, where Think Big spent $8.3 million against state Assemblymember Alex Bores. The Jobs and Democracy PAC countered with approximately $15 million to support Bores. Bores lost to Micah Lasher, 39% to 35%, marking a tactical win for the pro-development side despite the heavy financial outlay.
Spending in the current general-election cycle has focused on opposing candidates who benefited from primary support. Safeguards-focused groups spent $825,000 opposing two Republicans who received backing from Leading the Future-aligned groups during the primaries. Guardrails Alliance reported spending $412,500 each against Jay Feely in Arizona and Aaron Flint in Montana. The group also spent about $412,000 against Democratic Rep. Jimmy Gomez in California, a candidate endorsed by Leading the Future.
Major donors have adjusted their financial commitments in response to internal and public feedback. The Brockmans initially gave $25 million to Leading the Future but abandoned plans for an additional $25 million contribution. Meta returned $25 million to political groups this summer, reducing its planned state-level political push by nearly 40% to about $40 million. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, stated that the company is taking reputational hits and that spending money on politics is not the solution to public concerns about AI.
Public opinion data suggests a challenging environment for aggressive AI expansion. A CNBC All-America Economic Survey found that 52% of registered voters support pausing advanced AI development until Congress passes regulations. Only 32% favored moving ahead immediately. Additionally, 63% of voters said they would oppose an AI data center within 10 miles of their home. These figures indicate a significant portion of the electorate is weighing the risks of rapid deployment against the potential benefits.
Source: CNBC
