The AI industry’s race for influence includes $100 million in campaign cash

There’s a new race to influence federal regulation of artificial intelligence, driven by the companies leading the industry. Since last year, Anthropic and OpenAI have funneled $100 million into super PACs ahead of the midterm elections.So far, they’ve spent nearly $60 million on races around the country, sometimes against each other.“They’re definitely a new player in the super PAC landscape,” says Sarah Bryner, director of the research organization Public Agenda. “We didn’t see these groups even two years ago.” This cycle, super PACs backed and funded by the companies have spent money to support or oppose 65 candidates and purchased ads in primary and midterm races, according to a Monitor analysis of campaign finance disclosures.Among the hotly contested races where AI companies have become involved is the South Carolina U.S. Senate seat currently held by Republican Sen. Darline Graham. A super PAC backed by OpenAI – American Mission – has poured nearly $2.3 million into electing Ms. Graham, who was appointed to serve the remainder of her late brother Sen. Lindsey Graham’s term.An Anthropic-backed super PAC that spends on GOP candidates threw $1.5 million behind Republican Rep. Carlos De La Cruz in Texas. He faces an unexpectedly tough race in a newly redrawn district that’s testing the state GOP’s redistricting strategy. Often, the advertisements paid for by the groups don’t even mention AI.“What do Georgians need? More money in their pockets,” narrates a man’s voice over photos of Georgia Republican Rep. Rich McCormick, who American Mission this week disclosed supporting. The ad, which encourages voters to reelect Mr. McCormick, was paid for by an OpenAI-backed fund but makes no mention of artificial intelligence. SOURCE: Federal Election Commission | Jacob Turcotte/Staff In North Carolina, Jobs and Democracy PAC, which has links to Anthropic, spent over $1.6 million to help Democratic Rep. Valerie Foushee survive a spirited primary challenge from the left. Ms. Foushee, who co-chairs a task force that’s working to propose viable AI policies, also sat on a bipartisan AI task force last session, during her first term. Ms. Foushee is now expected to win reelection.While traditional political action committees are able to donate directly to candidates, they’re limited by contribution limits. Super PACs, though they cannot coordinate with or donate to campaigns, are unlimited in the amount they can raise and spend.In addition to spending aimed at a particular candidate, the groups also spend money on everything from operational costs to voter outreach and direct mailers. In the case of Leading the Future, that includes directing millions of dollars toward shell companies.The Campaign Legal Center filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission in May alleging that the OpenAI-backed PACs “have unlawfully evaded federal reporting requirements by funneling their payments for goods and services through shell companies set up to conceal how the super PACs are actually spending their money.” In a statement to the outlet Wired, which reported on the shadow companies, Leading the Future said it complies with all applicable laws.The funds tend to spend on two types of candidates: those they expect to win and hope to work with in the future, and those who have clear positions on AI regulation.Occasionally, Anthropic and OpenAI even spend against each other – in one case, amounting to a total of $27 million. That was to influence the race of New York state legislator Alex Bores, who was running for Congress. Mr. Bores, who had worked on AI regulation, lost his primary.In other instances, candidates’ stake in regulation is less clear. The companies may be interested in something as specific as a development deal in a certain district, or simply be looking to build relationships with future lawmakers.“I think that’s what they’re trying to do, is make friends,” says Ms. Bryner. Anthropic, which generally supports regulation, and OpenAI, which generally opposes regulation, each fund super PACs that support Republican and Democratic candidates, directed from their super PACs Public First and Leading the Future. It’s illegal for super PACs to coordinate directly with candidates, but often, groups spend money in the hopes that an official will take a meeting down the road.Public opinion of artificial intelligence is cautious; 64% of Americans say it’s developing too quickly.The companies look to be “[building] their slate of allies in Congress by spending on Super PAC advertisements,” Ms. Bryner says.Think Big, American Mission’s sister fund supporting Democratic candidates, paid for an ad supporting Michigan Democratic state Sen. Jeremy Moss, who is running for Congress. “He saved our healthcare from cuts, stood up to ICE, and fought attacks on our election,” says the narration.The spending by AI-backed PACs deviates slightly from the norm, since most super PAC spending is linked to party spending. Instead of giving via PAC and lobbying avenues, the companies are “jumping straight to the deep end,” says Ms. Bryner. Deepen your worldviewwith Monitor Highlights.Politics with respectGet political stories with respectful analysis.There‘s a world of new ideas in everyBooks newsletter.There‘s more to life, enrich yours withCulture & Learning weekly.Follow humanity‘s discoveries withScience & Nature stories in your inbox.Gain a spiritual perspectivefrom the stories in your inbox.Want to understand the deeper impact of critical events? Learn the Monitor‘s insight.Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads. “It is unusual for companies to sort of bypass traditional PAC giving in favor of super PAC spending,” she says. “It almost feels like they’re communicating more to the candidate than they are to the voters.”Staff writer Aaron Glantz, the Monitor's AI Bureau Chief, contributed to this article. ALREADY A SUBSCRIBER? LoginReal news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.The Christian Science Monitor was founded in 1908 to lift the standard of journalism and uplift humanity. We aim to “speak the truth in love.” Our goal is not to tell you what to think, but to give you the essential knowledge and understanding to come to your own intelligent conclusions. Join us in this mission by subscribing.