A new network of political action committees is quietly reshaping the debate around artificial intelligence ahead of the 2026 midterms. The bipartisan pro-AI coalition, led by the super PAC Leading the Future, has raised over $100 million from major tech investors and executives, including OpenAI president Greg Brockman and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. Their first move targets candidates who favor state-level AI regulations, signaling a push for federal preemption.
The PAC’s initial focus is New York State Assemblyman Alex Bores, who sponsored legislation requiring large AI companies to publish safety data. Leading the Future ran an attack ad claiming Bores would allow a “chaotic patchwork” of state rules that could harm innovation and cost jobs. The ad also links Bores to outside groups funded by the convicted crypto executive Sam Bankman-Fried. Bores responded that Silicon Valley billionaires are attempting to influence elections to avoid accountability while he stands up for public safety and transparency.
The effort mirrors strategies used by the cryptocurrency industry in prior election cycles, where PAC-backed campaigns successfully defeated candidates opposing rapid innovation in favor of consumer protections. Leading the Future aims to support like-minded candidates nationwide while discouraging elected officials from opposing the tech industry’s agenda. Meta is running a separate but complementary pro-AI PAC, emphasizing the bipartisan push to shape AI policy.
This political strategy highlights a growing tension in American governance. Federal preemption is favored by the tech industry and supported by the Trump administration, which has proposed executive action to prevent states from regulating AI independently. State-level regulations are seen as a potential obstacle to rapid AI deployment, which aligns with national security and economic competitiveness arguments. For Trump and tech allies, centralized federal rules simplify compliance, reduce uncertainty, and ensure U.S. companies maintain a competitive edge in global AI development.
Critics argue that this approach narrows the scope of policy debate. Leading the Future and similar PACs prioritize federal rules that limit state oversight, even as public concern over AI safety, labor displacement, and privacy grows. Pew Research Center surveys show that over half of Americans see AI as a high-risk technology, while Gallup reports 80% of U.S. adults believe government regulations are needed for safety and data security. By preempting state regulation, the industry risks marginalizing these concerns and centralizing decision-making power in Washington and Silicon Valley.
For everyday people, the implications are clear. Decisions about AI safety, privacy, and the local impact of data centers could increasingly bypass local representatives. Voters may find that the systems shaping their lives are influenced more by global corporations than by elected officials in their communities. Awareness of these forces is the first step toward engaging critically with technology policy and the political structures that govern it.
Email inquiries to hello@laterstack.com.
Related Laterstack Tech Stories
Stanford Graduates Face Job Market Shift as AI Replaces Entry-Level Roles
Microsoft’s Copilot Holiday Ad Shows Everything That Doesn’t Work
FTC Forces Instacart to Refund $60 Million Over Deceptive Subscription Practices
Google Sues Web Scraper for Stealing Search Results at ‘Astonishing Scale’