New York’s recent congressional primaries were intended to be a pivotal moment for the artificial intelligence industry's political influence, but the results suggest a more complex landscape than anticipated. A significant super PAC, Leading the Future (LTF), which aimed to elect candidates supportive of its "pro-AI agenda," found that its substantial spending did not yield a clear victory, potentially signaling challenges for its regulatory goals.
LTF, backed by prominent tech investors with a $100 million war chest, targeted New York Assembly member Alex Bores, a vocal proponent of AI regulation. Bores had sponsored the state's "RAISE Act," which mandates safety protocols for developers of advanced AI models and imposes fines for non-compliance. LTF vehemently opposed this legislation, aiming to demonstrate that supporting such regulations would be politically detrimental.
While Bores lost his bid to represent New York's 12th District, the outcome is far from a clear win for LTF's vision of light-touch AI regulation. The victor, Assembly member Micah Lasher, shares Bores's inclination towards strict oversight. Lasher co-sponsored the RAISE Act and campaigned on policies including pausing data center construction, launching antitrust investigations into AI labs, and protecting artists from copyright infringement. In his victory speech, Lasher directly addressed the AI companies that showed interest in the race, stating he would not take his cues from them regarding the protection of children, jobs, and families.
Furthermore, it remains uncertain whether LTF's opposition directly harmed Bores's campaign. Prior to LTF's intervention, betting markets had given Bores a low probability of winning. He ultimately finished a close second, trailing Lasher by only 4 percentage points. Some strategists suggest that LTF's aggressive stance may have inadvertently boosted Bores by validating his position as a critic of Big Tech, generating significant media attention.
The race also evolved into a contest between different factions within the AI industry itself. Bores received substantial donations from AI companies concerned with safety, such as Anthropic, the developer of Claude. Anthropic's super PAC reportedly provided Bores with at least $11 million, while crypto billionaire Chris Larsen contributed an additional $19 million. This influx of funding, a direct response to LTF's opposition, arguably aided Bores's fundraising efforts and highlighted the existence of a pro-regulation donor network within the tech sector.
Beyond AI, Lasher's victory can be attributed to his extensive political experience and connections within New York's Democratic Party. His long-standing presence in state politics and ties to influential figures like Michael Bloomberg and Kathy Hochul likely played a significant role in his campaign's success, potentially overshadowing the impact of the AI-related spending.
Meanwhile, the broader political climate has increasingly favored AI regulation. Public opinion polls consistently show a strong majority of Americans supporting regulations to protect public interests, even if it slows innovation. Surveys also indicate widespread opposition to new data center construction. Beyond public sentiment, national security concerns are also driving regulatory action. The White House has issued executive orders encouraging labs to seek government approval before releasing new models, and the Trump administration intervened to have Anthropic remove a model from the market on national security grounds.
Leading the Future's stance on the RAISE Act has also shown signs of adaptation. Initially critical of the bill, LTF later announced support for its final version, arguing it struck a balance between innovation and safety. However, this shift is viewed skeptically by some, given the group's prior lobbying efforts against the New York law and the minimal changes made to the legislation before its enactment. The group's change in public position appears to be a response to evolving political pressures, suggesting that proponents of less stringent AI regulation are facing increasing headwinds.