Anthropic and OpenAI have emerged as major new players in American electoral politics, funneling a combined $100 million into super PACs since last year to influence federal regulation of artificial intelligence. Ahead of the midterm elections, these industry leaders have already spent nearly $60 million across the country, occasionally directing funds to oppose each other in fiercely contested races.
Campaign finance disclosures analyzed by reporters show that super PACs backed by the AI companies have supported or opposed 65 candidates, purchasing advertisements in primary and midterm contests nationwide. Sarah Bryner, director of research at Public Agenda, noted that these deep-pocketed groups represent an unprecedented force in the current political landscape.
The spending targets a diverse array of federal and local races. In South Carolina, the OpenAI-backed super PAC American Mission poured nearly $2.3 million into the campaign of Republican Sen. Darline Graham, who was appointed to finish the term of her late brother, Sen. Lindsey Graham. Meanwhile, an Anthropic-backed super PAC supporting Republican candidates deployed $1.5 million to back Rep. Carlos De La Cruz in Texas as he faces a challenging contest in a newly redrawn district.
Many of the advertisements funded by these technology-backed committees do not mention artificial intelligence at all. In Georgia, an ad paid for by American Mission urged voters to reelect Republican Rep. Rich McCormick by focusing entirely on economic issues rather than tech policy. In North Carolina, the Anthropic-linked Jobs and Democracy PAC spent upwards of $1.6 million to assist Democratic Rep. Valerie Foushee in surviving a strong primary challenge from the left. Rep. Foushee previously sat on a bipartisan AI task force and currently co-chairs a policy-focused task group.
While traditional political action committees face strict contribution limits when donating directly to candidates, super PACs operate under no such financial caps. Although legally barred from coordinating directly with campaigns or donating funds straight to candidates, these independent expenditure-only committees finance a wide range of activities, including voter outreach, operational overhead, and direct mail campaigns.
Financial transparency surrounding these groups has already drawn regulatory scrutiny. In May, the Campaign Legal Center filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that OpenAI-backed PACs unlawfully bypassed federal reporting requirements. The complaint claims the committees funneled millions of dollars in payments for goods and services through shell companies designed to obscure how the super PACs spent their money. In a statement addressing reports on the shadow corporate entities, Leading the Future maintained that it fully complies with applicable laws.
The strategic rationale behind the spending varies. The companies frequently back candidates they expect to win and hope to engage with in the future, as well as those holding distinct stances on technology regulation. Anthropic generally advocates for regulatory frameworks, whereas OpenAI typically opposes them, yet both maintain super PAC arms supporting candidates across the political spectrum.
In some instances, the corporate-backed competition has been direct and expensive. Anthropic and OpenAI spent a combined $27 million trying to influence the congressional primary bid of New York state legislator Alex Bores, an official with a background in AI regulation who ultimately lost his primary contest. Beyond specific policy stances, observers suggest the financial push is also designed to forge long-term relationships with future lawmakers, sometimes centered on localized development deals or general goodwill.
Public opinion surveys indicate that 64% of Americans believe artificial intelligence is developing at an overly rapid pace. By skipping standard lobbying and traditional political action committees to dive straight into super PAC spending, the companies are establishing a direct channel of communication with prospective lawmakers rather than focusing strictly on persuading voters.
