Two AI-linked political networks are backing different approaches to regulating advanced AI: Leading the Future favors national standards, while the Public First network supports state and local safeguards when federal protections are inadequate. Reported campaign-finance figures show substantial activity, but they measure different things—committee donations, transfers, and spending on candidate communications—and should not be added together as one total.
What do the reported spending figures measure?
The amounts below come from Markus Kasanmascheff’s September 30, 2026 WinBuzzer report, which cites campaign-finance trackers, filings and statements. They are dated snapshots with different scopes, not a reconciled account of all money raised or spent by AI-related groups. None should be treated as a final total for the 2025–2026 election cycle.
| Reported amount | What it describes | Source and qualification |
|---|---|---|
| $57.48 million | Independent expenditures by the AI-focused federal committees followed by the Transformer tracker | Transformer snapshot reported by WinBuzzer on September 30, 2026. Independent expenditures are outside spending to support or oppose candidates, not donations to a committee. |
| $75.1 million | Direct contributions received by the Leading the Future federal committee during the 2025–2026 election cycle | Tech Influence Watch, as reported by WinBuzzer. The report attributes $50 million to Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz combined, and $25 million to Greg and Anna Brockman combined. |
| $10 million each | Leading the Future payments to Think Big and American Mission during April–June 2026 | WinBuzzer’s account of the second-quarter filings. The report says Leading the Future recorded no independent expenditures of its own in that quarter. |
| $901,161.12 | Think Big independent expenditures | WinBuzzer’s description of Think Big’s September 25, 2026 filing, including payments to Lantern Production Consultants and Manhattan Strategies. The figure refers to that filing and period, not all Think Big spending. |
| $40 million | Two donations of $20 million each to Public First Action | Anthropic’s July 2026 statement, as reported by WinBuzzer, described the donations as restricted to public education and policy work and prohibited for use to influence candidate elections. |
| $100 million | Amount Public First Action said it had raised by August 20, 2026 | A Public First Action spokesman told Reuters, as reported by WinBuzzer. About half was said to be for elections through two aligned PACs. This is a different scope and source from Anthropic’s restricted donations. |
These figures describe distinct points in political finance. A contribution is money received by a committee; a transfer moves money between organizations; an independent expenditure pays for candidate-related communications without being a contribution to the candidate. A single dollar can appear at more than one point in that chain, so adding contributions, transfers and downstream ad spending can count the same money more than once.
The Federal Election Commission’s campaign-finance database provides federal committee filings and independent-expenditure records, including the payee, purpose, date, amount, and candidate supported or opposed. Transformer says its tracker covers contributions, committee transfers, independent expenditures and employee donations. Those sources can help check specific entries, but the published figures above are not a transaction-by-transaction reconciliation.
#1 Best Overall
Which groups are involved, and how are they connected?
Leading the Future and its aligned committees
WinBuzzer describes Leading the Future as a network seeking to elect candidates who favor AI development and a national approach to standards. Think Big and American Mission are reported recipients of its second-quarter 2026 transfers; the report characterizes Think Big as supporting Democratic candidates and American Mission as supporting Republicans. A transfer to an affiliated committee is not itself proof of how much that recipient ultimately spent on a particular candidate.
The report identifies investors associated with Andreessen Horowitz and Greg Brockman among Leading the Future’s backers. OpenAI has said it neither finances nor directs the committee; employees may make personal donations. Transformer’s company-linked OpenAI page showed $13.14 million in individual donations to AI-related political spending organizations as of October 2, 2026, including a Greg Brockman entry for Leading the Future. That tracker view concerns individual donations associated with the company, not a transfer of OpenAI corporate funds.
Public First Action and aligned electoral committees
Public First Action is described as a nonprofit focused on AI policy and public education. Its restricted Anthropic support should be kept separate from the electoral activity of aligned political committees. WinBuzzer identifies Jobs and Democracy as a Democratic-aligned committee and Defending Our Values as a Republican-aligned one.
WinBuzzer also reports two transfers to Jobs and Democracy: a $3 million payment from Public First Action Inc. on April 15, 2026, and a separate $1.3 million payment from Public First between May 22 and June 3, 2026. These are transfers between organizations, not independent expenditures; they should not be added to later spending as if each were a separate round of end spending.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →What AI policies are the networks trying to influence?
The divide is not simply “pro-AI” versus “anti-AI.” It concerns who sets rules and what obligations apply before powerful systems are deployed.
- Federal or state authority: Leading the Future is described as favoring national standards. Public First Action supports state and local safeguards when adequate federal protections are absent. WinBuzzer says Anthropic opposes federal rules that displace state laws unless Congress adopts stronger safeguards.
- Safety evaluation and deployment: The report attributes to Anthropic’s July proposal independent evaluations of the most capable models, enforceable safety duties, and government authority to slow or block deployments that pose serious catastrophic risk.
- Reporting and audits: OpenAI has advocated common state safety rules that could develop into national standards, including incident reporting and independent audits, alongside federal evaluation of advanced models, according to WinBuzzer.
- Innovation and competition: Leading the Future’s launch framing emphasizes U.S. leadership and argues that policies that delay innovation could benefit China. That is the group’s argument about the consequences of regulation, not an established outcome.
The Associated Press’s September 27, 2026 coverage also describes OpenAI and Anthropic as seeking to shape AI controls through safety messaging and political activity. That broader account provides context; it does not independently verify every committee relationship or spending amount in the figures above.
What does the New York primary show?
WinBuzzer’s account of New York’s 12th Congressional District primary illustrates how national networks’ spending can intersect with a state AI law. Think Big opposed Assemblyman Alex Bores after his role sponsoring the Responsible AI Safety and Education Act, or RAISE Act. The report describes the law as requiring safety-incident reporting and information about developers’ safeguards. Jobs and Democracy backed Bores.
Bores lost the June 23, 2026 Democratic primary to fellow Assemblyman Micah Lasher, who also co-sponsored the state law, according to WinBuzzer. The case shows competing political activity around candidates associated with the regulation debate; it does not, by itself, establish that outside spending caused the result.
How can readers check changing totals?
Political spending totals change as committees file reports and trackers update their data. Transformer’s About page showed data as of October 3, 2026 at 00:29 UTC, while the $57.48 million figure above is specifically its September 30 snapshot as reported by WinBuzzer. For a later or more specific total, consult the relevant FEC filing and independent-expenditure records, then distinguish contributions and transfers from spending on candidate communications.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
