A16z-Backed Super PAC Attacks NY Lawmaker Over AI Bill
A political action committee backed by Andreessen Horowitz, OpenAI, and other Silicon Valley leaders launched a targeted campaign against Alex Bores, the New York Assembly member sponsoring the state’s AI safety legislation.
This action, the super PAC’s first against a lawmaker supporting AI regulation, was reported in November 2025 and represents a new front in tech’s pushback on AI oversight.
The key mechanism at work is the deployment of a focused political funding strategy that seeks to reshape legislative dynamics by applying financial pressure to individual sponsors of regulatory constraints.
This move signals a structural change for operators tracking AI policy: regulatory support is now a battleground for capital allocation, with direct campaign interference becoming a tool to lower political friction and delay constraint imposition.
Targeting Lawmakers to Shift AI Regulatory Constraints
The super PAC fueled by heavyweight investors like Andreessen Horowitz and OpenAI explicitly chose Alex Bores for opposition, making clear its intent to push back on New York’s AI safety bill.
Rather than broad lobbying, this move leverages direct electoral influence to make AI regulation politically costly for individual lawmakers. This short-circuits traditional, slower processes of regulatory influence.
This approach changes the constraint from legislative debate to campaign viability, effectively weaponizing political capital to keep regulatory hurdles low.
Instead of attempting to fight regulation at a system-wide level, they focus resources on a single point of failure: the lawmaker sponsoring a bill. This targeted pressure exploits the narrow political window where campaigns are most vulnerable.
How Focused Political Spending Unlocks Leverage in AI Policy
The interesting system mechanism here is the use of a super PAC as a leverage instrument to reshape the regulatory environment through political pressure instead of pure advocacy.
This leverages financial resources—backed by the large valuations and capital of firms like Andreessen Horowitz and OpenAI—to influence outcomes without the need for direct legislative lobbying or public campaigns.
Tactically, this approach multiplies impact by turning campaign financing into a signal that can deter sponsors of regulation, shifting the political cost-benefit calculation.
By focusing on one legislator’s campaign, the PAC can potentially create a ripple effect that discourages further sponsorship of AI regulatory bills.
Political Campaigns as the New Battleground for AI Regulation
This move should alert startups, investors, and policy watchers to a new kind of constraint: the fragility of AI regulatory environments shaped by targeted political investment.
Changing outcomes through legislative sponsorship challenges traditional long-term tech lobbying strategies and instead attacks the most immediate point of pressure: election funding.
This mirrors how tech companies have used election advertising to reshape policies on net neutrality, privacy, or gig economy laws, but here it is explicitly focused on AI safety legislation.
For operators, this means navigating AI regulatory risk requires factoring in political finance moves as a constraint-shifting mechanism.
Comparing to Traditional Lobbying and Public Advocacy
Unlike broad advocacy efforts that depend on coalition building and slow legislative cycles, the super PAC tactic turns money into a tactical weapon that works without continuous negotiation.
It's a positioning play that exploits the electoral system’s sensitivity to funding changes, reducing the cost and time of influencing outcomes.
This contrasts with typical tech lobbying, which relies heavily on distributed efforts among many stakeholders and public messaging campaigns.
The focused nature of this strategy makes it a lever with potentially outsized effects relative to capital invested.
This pattern appears in other domains where financial leverage replaces messy persuasion, akin to how some companies gain competitive advantage through acquisition rather than organic growth, as described in MTY Food Group’s approach to resetting growth levers.
Why Builders and Investors Should Track Political Pressure as AI’s Key Constraint
Tech investors and operators often underestimate how political campaign funding reshapes practical constraints around AI deployment and governance.
The campaign against Alex Bores demonstrates that AI regulation is no longer an abstract policy conversation but a direct fight over specific points of failure.
For founders and investors, understanding this mechanism is critical to anticipating regulatory risks and engaging with political systems efficiently.
This constraint shift—from legislative debate to targeted campaign financing—is a leverage point that will accelerate or stall AI safety frameworks across states and eventually federal levels.
Similar to how AI scaling bottlenecks are being addressed through infrastructure commitments, as highlighted in OpenAI’s $1.4T data center commitment, political spending emerges as a parallel lever for influencing AI’s future landscape.
Related Tools & Resources
Understanding the influence of political and financial leverage in shaping AI regulation requires clear access to relevant contacts and data. Apollo offers a powerful B2B sales intelligence platform that can help startups, investors, and operators connect with key decision-makers and track the shifting landscape of AI policy influence. For those navigating the complex interplay of technology and politics, Apollo provides crucial insights to turn strategic analysis into actionable outreach. Learn more about Apollo →
Full Transparency: Some links in this article are affiliate partnerships. If you find value in the tools we recommend and decide to try them, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. We only recommend tools that align with the strategic thinking we share here. Think of it as supporting independent business analysis while discovering leverage in your own operations.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the role of super PACs in influencing AI regulation?
Super PACs use focused political funding strategies to apply financial pressure on individual lawmakers, shaping AI regulatory environments by targeting campaigns rather than lobbying broadly.
How do political campaigns affect AI safety legislation?
Political campaigns have become key battlegrounds where targeted investments, like the 2025 super PAC campaign against Alex Bores, can increase the political cost of sponsoring AI safety bills, potentially delaying regulation.
Why are tech investors interested in political campaign funding related to AI?
Tech investors view political campaign financing as a leverage point that can accelerate or stall AI safety frameworks by influencing specific lawmakers' campaign viability instead of engaging in traditional lobbying.
How does the strategy of targeting individual lawmakers differ from traditional lobbying?
Targeting individual lawmakers through direct electoral influence bypasses slow coalition-building and legislative debate, using financial pressure to create immediate political costs for sponsoring AI regulation.
What impact did the 2025 super PAC supported by Andreessen Horowitz and OpenAI have on AI policy?
The super PAC launched a focused campaign against NY Assembly member Alex Bores, signaling a shift towards using campaign funding as a tactical weapon to reshape AI regulatory constraints at the legislative sponsor level.
How does political spending parallel AI infrastructure investments?
Political spending acts as a strategic lever for AI's future similar to how firms like OpenAI commit $1.4 trillion to data center infrastructure, exerting influence on AI deployment and governance beyond technical means.
What makes super PACs' focused spending potentially more effective than broad tech lobbying?
Focused spending targets the narrow vulnerability window of election campaigns, delivering outsized influence per dollar by weaponizing campaign finance instead of relying on slow public advocacy and coalition efforts.
What should startups and investors consider regarding AI regulatory risk?
They need to factor in political finance moves as key constraints on AI regulation, recognizing that legislative sponsorship and campaign funding now directly affect AI policy outcomes.