Anthropic-Backed AI Safety Group Wins 10 of 17 Races After Costly Midterm Fight

The results test whether the AI industry's political spending can shield it from regulation as voters turn sceptical. An NBC exit poll found that two-thirds of voters think AI will harm society more than help it, and 43 cities voted to restrict data centre development, Bloomberg reported. The midterms were also the first big electoral test for AI money on both sides of the regulation debate, with Anthropic's backers on one side and investors including Marc Andreessen on the other.

Leading the Future, the network that opposes stricter AI rules and is backed by Andreessen and other technology figures, spent at least $54 million. Forty-one of the 48 candidates it supported won, and two races, including the Mississippi Senate contest involving Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, had not been called. TNW, citing WIRED, reported that the roughly $10 million the group spent in general elections went mostly to safe seats. Its winners included Julia Letlow in Louisiana's Senate race, Ben McAdams in Utah and Ritchie Torres in New York.

Public First spent most heavily on Democrats Scott Wiener in California, at $3.5 million, Manny Rutinel in Colorado, at $2.6 million, and Valerie Foushee in North Carolina, at $1.62 million. It also backed Republicans, including Celeste Maloy in Utah with $998,739 and Kevin Hern in Oklahoma's Senate race with $808,341.

Both sides took losses. Public First's most expensive bet came before the general election. It spent about $15 million supporting Alex Bores in a June Democratic primary in New York, while Leading the Future spent about $8 million against him. Bores lost that race to Micah Lasher. Public First's Republican arm, Defending Our Values, also lost in November: it spent $1.49 million on Carlos De La Cruz in Texas's 35th district and $974,908 on Rhett Marques in Alabama's 2nd district, according to TNW.

Leading the Future's biggest general-election defeat was in South Carolina, where Republican Darline Graham lost the Senate race to Democrat Annie Andrews, who had called her "Data Center Darline." Accounts of the spending differ. Bloomberg put Leading the Future's outlay on Graham at more than $4.1 million, while TNW reported that two super PACs linked to the group spent $4.8 million.

Brad Carson, a co-founder of Public First, described the results as "a crushing blow to the AI industry's anti-regulatory efforts." Leading the Future also had trouble with donors during the campaign. OpenAI president Greg Brockman withdrew a planned $25 million donation after pushback from employees, and the investor Ron Conway distanced himself from the group, Bloomberg reported.

The AI groups were outspent by other political donors. Elon Musk put more than $445 million into the election, and Fairshake, the cryptocurrency industry's super PAC, spent $166 million, according to Bloomberg. Totals for AI spending vary by source and date. Tech Influence Watch, a tracker run by Molly White, put AI super PAC spending at $79 million across 68 House and Senate seats, TNW reported on November 5.

The results are unlikely to make federal AI legislation easy to pass. A bill needs both chambers and the president's signature, so opponents can block or water down legislation more easily than supporters can pass it. "AI regulation cannot pass without 60 votes in the Senate," said Jesse Hunt, a spokesman for Leading the Future. The group has said it will keep spending in the 2028 cycle and sees primaries as a better use of its money. Bores is raising money for a new nonprofit, Who Decides, which aims to raise $30 million before 2028, according to TNW.