TL;DR
AI companies and their backers are pouring hundreds of millions into the 2026 US midterms through super PACs, led by Leading the Future (funded by a16z’s Andreessen and Horowitz and OpenAI’s Greg Brockman) and the newer Innovation Council Action. Their consistent goal: a single national AI framework that preempts state-by-state regulation, and defeating lawmakers who push tougher rules. The push follows the Senate stripping a federal preemption provision, and it raises “dark money” concerns from watchdogs, though the industry is not monolithic (Anthropic’s contribution is restricted to policy education).
AI companies and their backers are pouring vast sums into the 2026 US midterms through super PACs. The spending runs into the hundreds of millions across the sector, CNBC reports, and their central demand is remarkably consistent.
They want a single national framework for AI, not a patchwork of state laws. The industry argues that 50 different regimes would slow development and hand an edge to China.
The flagship vehicle is Leading the Future, a super PAC network launched in 2025. Andreessen Horowitz co-founders Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz reportedly gave $25m each, alongside OpenAI president Greg Brockman.
The group backs candidates who support what it calls a “responsible national framework” and opposes those who undermine it. It has already spent tens of millions across races from Texas and Georgia to Illinois and Montana.
The 💜 of EU tech
The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!
It is not alone, with a newer pro-deregulation group, Innovation Council Action, pledging around $100m. Its reported donors span crypto and AI money, from the Winklevoss twins to Elon Musk’s xAI orbit.
Why the money is flowing now
The timing is not random. Washington tried and failed to freeze state AI laws, with the Senate stripping a preemption provision by 99 votes to 1 before the bill was signed.
Having lost that fight in Congress, the industry is taking it to the ballot box. The push mirrors White House efforts to trade state preemption for federal online-safety rules, a deal that has yet to land.
States, meanwhile, are moving the other way, introducing well over a thousand AI bills in 2025 alone. That gap between a stalled federal approach and a busy statehouse season is exactly what the money aims to close.
Not every AI firm plays it the same way
The industry is not a monolith on regulation. Anthropic reportedly gave $20m, but restricted to educating the public on AI policy rather than political campaigning, and it has argued governments should be able to block dangerous AI.
That split matters, because “pro-AI” money is not uniformly anti-rules. Microsoft’s Brad Smith has separately complained the US regulates AI with no clear rules at all, a vacuum this spending would help fill on industry terms.
The democracy question
Critics see something more troubling than ordinary lobbying. Watchdog groups have branded the wave “dark money” and warned of corporations trying to buy favourable regulation before the technology is understood.
Supporters counter that political spending is legal, disclosed in part, and no different from other industries defending their interests. The clash is sharpened by a public already wary of AI, evident in the grassroots revolts blocking data-centre projects.
What the money buys, in the end, is not just ads but a frame, that AI rules should be national, light, and set with the industry in the room. Whether voters accept that frame is the test these millions are designed to pass.
