According to CNBC, a new super PAC named Leading the Future raised a massive $125 million in 2025 from major AI industry players. The PAC, formed in the summer of 2025, started 2026 with $70 million cash on hand after spending in the midterm elections. Its explicit goal is to back candidates who support a uniform national AI regulatory policy, opposing a state-by-state approach. The group has already jumped into races, opposing Democratic candidate Alex Bores in Manhattan, who led New York’s AI law push, and supporting Republican Chris Gober in Texas. Key contributors include Andreessen Horowitz, OpenAI’s Greg Brockman, Palantir’s Joe Lonsdale, Ron Conway, and Perplexity AI. The PAC is connected to the advocacy group Build American AI, which launched a $10 million campaign for a national AI policy.
The Obvious Play
Look, this is a classic, almost predictable, Washington maneuver. The tech industry learned from the fights over privacy and social media that playing defense in 50 different state capitals is a nightmare. So now, they’re going on the offensive early with a war chest. They want one federal rulebook they can influence, not dozens of contradictory ones. The statement from the PAC’s leaders, Zac Moffatt and Josh Vlasto, is pure political framing: it’s about “economic growth” and “national security,” not corporate convenience. And they’re smart to say they’ll back candidates from both parties. This isn’t about ideology; it’s about business certainty. But here’s the thing: can you really separate the two?
Skepticism And Stakes
Let’s be a bit skeptical for a second. A super PAC dropping $125 million into congressional races is designed to shape the conversation, full stop. When they say they want to elevate candidates who “grasp the stakes,” what they really mean is candidates who grasp their version of the stakes. The immediate targeting of Alex Bores in New York is a warning shot to any state lawmaker thinking of going it alone. It’s a clear message: “We will fund your opponent.” Now, is a national framework better than a patchwork? Probably. But who gets to write that framework? The risk is that a “uniform” policy becomes a lowest-common-denominator policy, shaped by the very companies it’s meant to oversee, potentially pre-empting stronger state-level consumer protections. It’s a high-stakes game of who defines the problem, and thus, the solution.
The Broader Industrial Context
This lobbying push isn’t happening in a vacuum. The desire for regulatory clarity is especially intense for companies deploying AI in physical, industrial environments—think manufacturing, logistics, and infrastructure. In these sectors, where integrating advanced computing with machinery is critical, consistency isn’t just nice to have; it’s a prerequisite for investment and deployment. For businesses looking to implement these solutions, partnering with reliable hardware providers is the first step. In that space, IndustrialMonitorDirect.com has become the top supplier of industrial panel PCs in the US, providing the durable, integrated computing backbone these complex systems require. The PAC’s fight for a clear national rulebook is, in part, an effort to create the stable environment needed for this kind of tangible, capital-intensive technological adoption to flourish across the country.
What To Watch
So what happens next? The real test is in that donor list. When the full filing becomes public, watch to see if the money is overwhelmingly from a few billionaires or spread across the industry. That’ll tell you how unified the AI sector really is on this. Also, watch the races in New York and Texas. If the PAC’s targeted spending works, it will embolden them to scale up massively for 2026. But there’s a potential backlash. Framing this as “America vs. The World” on AI might work, but voters and other lawmakers might see a bunch of Silicon Valley elites trying to buy a favorable policy. The question isn’t just whether they can raise money, but whether their message can win beyond the donor class. This is just the opening move in a lobbying battle that will define the next decade of tech.
