AI PACs Spent Millions to Shape Congress — Results Were Mixed

What happened

Political groups on both sides of the AI fight spent millions trying to shape Tuesday's midterm elections. The results were mixed, and some of the biggest bets lost outright.

On the industry side, two AI-focused political action committees, American Mission and Building the Future, put a combined $4.8 million behind South Carolina Senate candidate Darline Graham. She lost. American Mission is the Republican spending arm of Leading the Future, a political group backed by OpenAI president Greg Brockman and venture firm Andreessen Horowitz.

American Mission also spent more than $500,000 each on Republican House candidates Aaron Flint in Montana and Laurie Buckhout in North Carolina. Both lost. Leading the Future's Democratic arm, Think Big, had better luck: it backed Florida Rep. Jared Moskowitz, who won reelection.

Groups pushing stronger AI safeguards had a mixed night too. Public First, backed by [Anthropic](/article/anthropic-flashprove-verify-ai-model-answered), supported several Republicans who lost through its affiliated PAC, but did better with Democratic candidates. It also gave $3 million to a PAC supporting California state Sen. Scott Wiener, who was leading his race when the results were tallied.

Guardrails Alliance, a group that wants to make taking money from AI companies a political liability, spent more than $1 million each opposing California Rep. Jimmy Gomez and Montana's Aaron Flint. Both men lost their races. The group also spent $300,000 backing Angela Gonzales-Torres, who defeated Gomez.

Why it matters

The spending shows how central AI policy has become to American politics, and how uncertain its politics still are. Tech money flooded into races on both sides, yet it did not reliably deliver wins. That is a warning for an industry used to getting its way in Washington.

Part of the explanation sits outside AI entirely. The money landed in the middle of a Democratic wave, and it is hard to separate the effect of AI spending from the broader national mood. Elon Musk, who reportedly poured about half a billion dollars into supporting Republicans, also watched many of his candidates lose. The midterms overall were the most expensive on record, costing about [$12 billion](/article/us-midterms-cost-record-12-billion).

The deeper story is the fight over who writes AI rules in America. One side wants Congress to set a single national framework that overrides state laws. The other wants states to keep the power to impose their own safeguards. Tuesday's results did not settle that fight. They showed both camps are willing to spend heavily, and that voters are not automatically impressed.

What it means for the US

For American voters, the stakes are concrete. Whether AI rules come from Washington or from state capitals decides how fast safeguards arrive and how uniform they are. A national framework could preempt tougher state laws, including California's. State-led rules could leave a patchwork that companies must follow state by state.

The results also signal that AI money itself is becoming a campaign issue. Guardrails Alliance says its ads focus directly on which candidates take money from the AI industry, and its political director Charlie Blaettler says the goal is to make that money "politically toxic." If that tactic works, future candidates may think twice before accepting tech backing, which would change how the industry lobbies Congress. Democrats in the new Congress have already signaled [scrutiny of Musk's political role](/article/democrats-scrutinize-musk-after-midterm-sweep) after the midterm sweep.

What happens next

Neither side is backing down. Leading the Future, which favors a single national framework, told TechCrunch it plans to keep spending in the 2028 elections. Guardrails Alliance says it will keep opposing candidates backed by the AI industry.

Leading the Future also says its real focus is primaries, not general elections. The group argues that spending in primaries builds name recognition and helps candidates set AI policy agendas early. It spent $27.38 million in this year's primaries, including $8 million opposing New York Assembly member Alex Bores, who lost his bid for Congress in June. Expect the next big AI money fight to arrive well before November 2028, in primary races most voters are not watching yet.