The Guardian view on AI money in US politics: not the way to hold an urgent democratic debate | Editorial

As concerns over artificial intelligence’s societal impact grow, prominent figures in the tech industry have increasingly weighed in on its future. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently published a lengthy essay advocating for minimal regulation of AI development, arguing that excessive oversight could hinder U.S. progress in the field. His 6,500-word piece, which envisions widespread innovation and economic opportunity, reflects a tech-utopian perspective that critics argue serves his company’s interests. While Zuckerberg’s lobbying efforts are transparent, the broader push for deregulation in AI policy is unfolding through less visible means.

With midterm elections approaching in the U.S., Silicon Valley is deploying a strategy reminiscent of cryptocurrency backers in recent cycles. Major tech figures, including OpenAI’s Greg Brockman and Palantir’s Jo Lonsdale, are funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into Super PACs—political action committees unaffiliated with campaigns or parties—to support candidates aligned with their deregulatory AI agenda. One such group, Leading the Future, has spent millions on ads targeting AI regulation advocates, including New York assemblyman Alex Bores, whose past work with federal agencies was misrepresented in an effort to undermine his progressive stance. Bores lost a closely contested primary race, raising concerns about the influence of misleading campaign tactics.

Opposition to these efforts is emerging. Guardrails Alliance, a union-backed Super PAC, is working to counterbalance the tech industry’s influence, while bipartisan opposition to data center expansion is gaining traction among voters. However, critics warn that the influx of corporate money is distorting democratic debate, particularly as unelected tech leaders push for policies that prioritize their interests over public oversight. Zuckerberg’s call for AI’s democratizing potential to be protected from centralized control contrasts sharply with the reality of an industry-driven regulatory landscape, where billionaires and their allies shape policy behind the scenes.