It seeks to sideline a faction known in tech circles as “AI doomers”, who have asked Congress for more AI regulation and argued that today’s fallible chatbots could rapidly evolve to be so clever and powerful that they threaten human survival.
Billionaire investor Marc Andreessen, whose venture firm backed Leading the Future and has spent US$2.7m so far this year lobbying Congress, filings show, has called those efforts “doomer astroturf” – designed to create the appearance of grassroots concerns.
Leading the Future is modelled in part on Fairshake, a tech-funded super PAC that led a coalition of groups to funnel more than US$130m into congressional races last year and secure favourable regulations for cryptocurrency.
That intervention helped topple popular Democrats like Katie Porter and Sherrod Brown, setting the stage for crypto-friendly legislation in Trump’s second term.
The AI industry has not faced the regulatory headwinds that once stymied crypto firms.
Josh Vlasto, a leader of the new AI super PAC and an adviser to Fairshake, said in an interview that Leading the Future could engineer similar success in Washington for the faction of the AI industry he characterised as having an optimistic and forward-looking agenda.
Andreessen Horowitz, which has billions invested in cryptocurrency and AI ventures, also backed Fairshake.
Chris MacKenzie, vice-president of communications for Americans for Responsible Innovation, an advocacy group that supports AI regulation, said adopting Fairshake’s tactics could be effective.
“Lawmakers just have to know there’s US$100m waiting to fund attack ads to worry about what happens if they speak up,” MacKenzie said.
His group helped co-ordinate opposition to a 10-year moratorium on state AI regulation that was passed by the House but died in the Senate last month.
Leading the Future will also take on a philosophical rift that has dominated debate over AI policy following the launch of ChatGPT.
It pits “doomers” against “AI boomers”, who argue that the industry must be allowed to accelerate without restrictions if AI is going to help society advance.
The optimistic view is pushed by a loose coalition of start-up executives, Silicon Valley investors, and open-source AI enthusiasts, who often cite the need for the US to beat China in a technological race.
Many groups and figures who take the more pessimistic view have ties to effective altruism, a movement that has largely pivoted to focusing on dangers that super-advanced AI could pose.
Vlasto described that camp as a formidable opponent that has spent the past decade building up a network of think-tanks and policy organisations.
Michael Kleinman, head of US policy at the non-profit Future of Life Institute, which has campaigned for the tech industry and regulators to consider AI an existential risk to humanity, said the new super PAC is a sign of desperation from AI firms after the failed attempt to pass the moratorium on state AI regulation.
“The industry has decided to throw this US$100m Hail Mary pass to block meaningful guardrails on AI,” he said. “It won’t work.”
Leading the Future said it will also launch an allied non-profit to lead rapid-response campaigns to counter “anti-innovation narratives” and work on legislative scorecards to rate lawmakers’ positions on AI.
Unlike Fairshake, the crypto political group, the pro-AI super PAC won’t be wholly focused on Congress and plans to intervene in some states.
It will begin operations in New York, California, Illinois, and Ohio this year and announce additional funders in the coming weeks.
A person familiar with the development of the super PAC, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said it would focus on states passing legislation that seems to align with doomers or slow down AI development, and target counties that restrict the potential for building infrastructure to support AI.
In Washington, the super PAC could choose to join those keeping alive the idea of a federal moratorium on state AI laws.
The House approved the measure as part of the GOP’s sweeping tax and immigration Bill, but the Senate dropped it in an 11th-hour vote after a flurry of bipartisan opposition.
Backers and critics of the proposal have said they expect the concept to resurface in future AI-related bills.
Sign up to Herald Premium Editor’s Picks, delivered straight to your inbox every Friday. Editor-in-Chief Murray Kirkness picks the week’s best features, interviews and investigations. Sign up for Herald Premium here.
