The Democratic primary in New York’s 12th congressional district is drawing national attention, with the race's outcome potentially influencing the party's approach to artificial intelligence regulation. State Assemblyman Alex Bores, a computer scientist, is in a tight contest against fellow assemblyman Micah Lasher for the seat representing a heavily Democratic district in Manhattan.
The race has become a focal point for factions within the artificial intelligence industry, with millions of dollars being poured into the contest by groups advocating for and against AI regulation. This has made it one of the most expensive congressional primaries in U.S. history.
If Bores secures victory, some Democratic operatives believe it will embolden the party to engage in a more robust debate about regulating AI, potentially appealing to a growing segment of voters who express skepticism about the technology. A senior Democratic operative, speaking anonymously, suggested that AI could be a significant issue in the 2028 presidential election, and that clear party leadership on the matter would be crucial for building voter trust.
While progressive figures like Sen. Bernie Sanders have voiced concerns about the AI industry and proposed regulations, Democratic leadership in Congress has largely advised candidates in competitive races to avoid the topic. However, top strategists within the party see a political advantage in addressing AI policy proactively.
Bores has framed his campaign as a critical stand on AI regulation, stating that the race will determine whether members of Congress have the freedom to address the issue and regulate powerful AI models. He authored a state law targeting the most advanced AI models, which drew criticism from some industry groups.
Lasher, who has secured endorsements from figures like retiring Rep. Jerry Nadler and Gov. Kathy Hochul, is considered a slight favorite. He has benefited from significant funding from a super PAC backed by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Bores, meanwhile, has garnered support from local unions and progressive organizations, including Our Revolution, which specifically cited his stance on AI regulation as a reason for their endorsement. These endorsements are notable given Bores' more moderate positions on other issues.
Bores has described the race as a coalition-building effort against "AI oligarchs," whom he accuses of seeking undue control over jobs and information. Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, acknowledged Bores' more centrist profile but deemed his fight against the AI industry significant enough to warrant the group's support.
Geevarghese indicated that a Bores loss could signal to mainstream Democrats the risks of confronting the industry, while a win might provide the courage needed to engage more directly with AI policy. The primary opposition to Bores has come from a group called Leading The Future, funded largely by venture capital executives and OpenAI, which advocates for a national regulatory framework that emphasizes American competitiveness and safety guardrails. The group has spent over $8 million attacking Bores, asserting that its goal is not to oppose regulation but to ensure it is passed at the national level.
Conversely, Bores has also received substantial backing from entities associated with AI companies like Anthropic, which favor stricter regulation. Sources indicate that support for Bores from this wing of the industry predates the involvement of Leading The Future. Josh Vlasto, a strategist for Leading The Future, stated that his group stands against the "unprecedented effort" to influence the race and supports a transparent national AI framework.
While this election is seen as a significant early engagement in the political discourse surrounding AI, it is widely expected to be just the beginning of the Democratic Party's interactions with the evolving industry.