Advocates for AI safety and regulation have become a notable force in the current U.S. election cycle, spending roughly $48–50 million on candidates who favor or are open to AI regulation, according to a new analysis shared exclusively with Axios.
How much and who is giving
The figures show that AI-safety groups and individual donors have spent about $48 million this cycle on both Democratic and Republican contests. Donors include researchers such as OpenAI employee Juan Felipe Cerón Uribe and Redwood researcher Aryan Bhatt, as well as organized groups and philanthropies.
Guardrails Alliance, a tech-worker backed AI-safety group, has raised $11.7 million across its super PAC and 501(c)(4). Longer-standing philanthropic sources that have supported AI-safety work for years — including funds linked to Coefficient Giving — have also contributed to the political activity.
Why this matters
The surge in AI-safety spending highlights unusual power dynamics in the AI ecosystem: researchers and safety advocates are shaping policy debates in ways that sometimes diverge from the priorities of the companies that develop the technology. At the same time, public concern about catastrophic AI risks and local opposition to data centers are mobilizing voters across both blue and red districts.
Industry money and internal tensions
The political influence of industry money has become complicated. OpenAI President Greg Brockman withdrew a planned second $25 million donation to Leading the Future, a super PAC backed by tech executives and investors, in part because of internal pushback at OpenAI. Leading the Future reported holding more than $31 million at the end of the second quarter and has supported more than 15 Democrats and more than 25 Republicans.
Observers say groups and networks favoring rapid AI advancement have not spent as much as opponents expected earlier in the year, creating an opening for safety-focused donors to increase their influence.
Individual donors and their motivations
Jacob Eliosoff, who runs the cryptocurrency investment fund Calibrated Markets, said he began making political contributions related to AI after seeing early fundraising and candidate advocacy from Leading the Future. As an active participant in New York's effective altruism community, Eliosoff said he wanted to avoid a repeat of 2024, when he believes crypto industry funding had outsized influence on many candidates' regulatory positions.
Eliosoff has given to both Democrats and Republicans he sees as willing to take AI risks seriously and capable of advancing regulation. Donors told Axios they were often motivated less by party or a single policy platform and more by concern that industry spending would silence candidates on a controversial technology.
Reactions and concerns
Guardrails Alliance Executive Director Shaunna Thomas said this cycle will test whether candidates who accept AI-industry money and oppose substantive regulation will lose and whether such outcomes will be understood as central to their defeats. Thomas argued that Republican leadership and the Trump-aligned faction are out of step with most Americans on AI, and that Democrats should take a bold stance.
However, Guardrails Alliance has faced criticism from some Democrats who warn that its strategy — which can include opposing certain Democratic candidates — risks enabling Republicans less inclined to regulate AI.
Bottom line
Trump allies and other critics have opened a new front against Anthropic and safety advocates associated with the effective altruism movement. Still, the flow of political contributions from pro-safety donors and the vocal stance of AI insiders suggest that pro-safety advocacy is gaining political clout and will likely play a larger role in upcoming policy debates.
