Már 78,5 millió dollárt költöttek az amerikai AI-lobbicsoportok a választási kampányban

Silicon Valley's bid to dominate artificial intelligence politics has devolved into a fight with itself. With one week until the midterm election, political groups favoring faster AI development and lighter, more uniform rules have spent roughly $8 million in general-election congressional races, besting groups pushing for stronger safeguards and more room for states to regulate that have spent about $6.9 million, according to a CNBC analysis of Federal Election Commission filings through Oct. 20. In Florida's 25th Congressional District, that split has produced a direct face-off. During the primary, Think Big, an affiliate of Leading the Future, the main super PAC network pushing faster AI development and lighter regulation, spent $310,000 supporting Democrat Jared Moskowitz, whose district changed after Florida redrew its congressional map ahead of the 2026 election. On the other side, Defending Our Values, a super PAC favoring stricter safety guardrails and state-level authority, dropped almost $857,000 to boost Republican Scott Singer and an additional $740,000 to keep one of his primary opponents from being elected. Now, Moskowitz and Singer face off in the general election. It's a microcosm of the breakdown in Silicon Valley's bid to build a unified AI political machine. Both sides favor AI innovation and agree on the need for guardrails, but they remain locked in a costly tug-of-war over which candidates to back — and which will best align with their preferred deployment speed, regulatory reach and balance of state power. Electing more allies could give either camp an edge in shaping AI policy in the next Congress, even as the feud risks weakening Silicon Valley's clout. "Everyone supports some form of regulation. It's just a debate about how much," said Bruce Freed, president and co-founder of the nonpartisan Center for Political Accountability and a former chief investigator for the Senate banking committee. "Money is flowing in all directions to be in the driver's seat of what happens." CNBC identified federal committees aligned with each camp and totaled their FEC-reported independent expenditures supporting or opposing congressional candidates. The analysis excludes state races and nonprofit advocacy spending. This was not the plan. The model was cryptocurrency. Fairshake and its affiliated pro-crypto super PACs, backed by Coinbase, Ripple and Andreessen Horowitz, spent more than $130 million during the 2024 election cycle, according to FEC filings. Candidates it supported won 53 of 58 races, a 91% success rate, according to crypto publication CoinDesk. AI investors took note. In August 2025, Leading the Future launched with more than $100 million in commitments from tech heavyweights including Andreessen Horowitz, OpenAI President Greg Brockman and his wife, Anna, and Perplexity and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale. Co-led by Josh Vlasto, who worked for Fairshake last election cycle, the network deployed a Democratic PAC, Think Big, and a Republican PAC, American Mission, to support candidates aligned with faster AI development and opposition to a patchwork of state regulations. The message was clear: Back AI's agenda or risk millions being spent against you. "The AI industry announced last year that they were going to rerun the crypto industry playbook by coming in swinging with oodles of money in order to bully lawmakers into submission," said Sacha Haworth, founder and executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, a nonprofit watchdog that advocates for stronger regulation of Big Tech and AI. At first, it worked. In the cycle's first major primaries in March, three candidates heavily backed by American Mission — Jessica Steinmann in Texas, Chris Gober in Texas and Laurie Buckhout in North Carolina — won their Republican contests after the group spent more than $500,000 supporting each, according to FEC filings. But a rival infrastructure was already taking shape. Anthropic committed $20 milli