**
In a pivotal moment for the 2026 midterm elections, New York City’s Democratic primary in the 12th Congressional District has become a battleground of competing visions for artificial intelligence regulation. With over $100 million poured into various congressional races, nearly half of this funding has converged on a single candidate: Alex Bores. As the incumbent Democratic Assemblymember faces fierce opposition, the implications for AI governance are profound, signalling a shift in how technology intersects with politics.
A Battle for Congressional Control
The political landscape is heating up as AI-focused Super PACs mobilise unprecedented financial resources to influence the legislative future of artificial intelligence. This cycle alone, these groups have amassed over $100 million, with approximately $49 million already expended across numerous races. However, a staggering $49 million of that has been earmarked specifically for the New York 12 primary, which has transformed into a microcosm of a larger ideological struggle over AI regulation.
At the heart of this contest is Alex Bores, whose background in technology informs his approach to legislative oversight. A year ago, Bores championed the Raise Act, a significant legislative initiative that mandates major AI developers to disclose public safety measures. This bold stance has not only drawn attention but has also made him a target for a barrage of attack ads funded by the Super PAC Think Big, a component of the bipartisan network Leading the Future. To date, Think Big has invested approximately $8.2 million into the campaign, with its war chest primarily financed by four influential donors, including prominent venture capitalists and tech industry leaders.
The Two-Sided Fight Over AI Regulation
As Bores faces down the financial onslaught from Leading the Future, a counter-movement has emerged, supported by Super PACs advocating for stricter AI regulations. Groups such as You Can Push Back and Jobs and Democracy have rallied behind Bores, deploying nearly $16 million in advertisements to counter the narrative of “right-wing billionaires” attempting to manipulate the electoral process. This situation has led to what some are calling an “AI civil war,” with contrasting factions vying for control over how AI will be governed in the United States.
The funding origins of these Super PACs are as diverse as their messages. While Leading the Future leans heavily on backing from Silicon Valley, advocating for a unified federal regulatory framework, the counter-groups have attracted support from various sectors, including notable contributions from the AI firm Anthropic. This company has positioned itself as an ethical alternative within the tech landscape, advocating for a cautious approach to AI development. Yet, the opaque nature of funding for groups like Public First raises questions about potential conflicts of interest, especially as they advocate for candidates who may not always align with the priorities of the average voter.
Polling Dynamics and Voter Sentiment
Despite the financial might of these Super PACs, public sentiment regarding AI appears far more cautious. Recent polling indicates that a significant majority of Americans, approximately two-thirds, believe AI is advancing too rapidly, with only 20% anticipating positive economic outcomes from its proliferation. These views transcend party lines, suggesting a growing unease about the implications of unchecked technological advancement.
Bores has adeptly reframed the primary as a referendum on the future of AI regulation, stating, “This is the first congressional race in the country where the dividing line is: can we regulate AI at all?” His rising profile in the race can be attributed not only to his advocacy but also to the geographical context of NY-12, a district that leans heavily Democratic and harbours a workforce significantly impacted by AI technologies. The stakes are high, as voters grapple with the implications of AI on their livelihoods and the broader economy.
The Broader Implications for Future Elections
While the financial strategies employed by both sides draw parallels to previous election cycles, particularly those associated with cryptocurrency, the AI sector faces a unique challenge. Unlike crypto, which benefitted from a passionate investor base eager to see their interests represented, AI does not yet enjoy a similarly engaged constituency. This disconnect raises critical questions about the long-term viability of the industry’s political strategies and the effectiveness of Super PAC funding in swaying public opinion.
Moreover, the emergence of new Super PACs, such as Guardrails Alliance, signals a burgeoning effort to counter the influence of pro-AI factions. With backing from labour unions and advocates for responsible AI development, these groups aim to offer a voice to those wary of the rapid technological changes sweeping through society.
Why it Matters
The unfolding drama in New York’s 12th Congressional District is emblematic of a larger national debate over the governance of artificial intelligence. As the outcomes of this primary could set significant precedents for future policy, the stakes extend beyond the electoral arena. This race will not only shape the regulatory environment for AI but also influence how technology companies align their strategies with political realities. The implications for voters are profound; their choices may determine the balance between innovation and accountability, setting a critical standard for how emerging technologies are integrated into the fabric of American life.
