AI-Backed Super PAC Raises $125M to Push National Tech Policy

A super PAC backed by prominent figures and firms in the artificial intelligence industry raised $125 million in 2025, positioning itself as a major force in shaping U.S. technology policy ahead of the 2026 election cycle.

The group, Leading the Future, said it ended the year with $70 million in cash on hand, according to an announcement released ahead of its first formal campaign finance filing. The PAC was formed last summer and is focused on backing candidates who favor federal AI regulations, rather than a fragmented, state-by-state approach.

Several U.S. states have already enacted — or are considering — their own AI laws, creating a regulatory patchwork that parts of the industry warn could slow innovation and weaken U.S. competitiveness.

“Leadership in AI innovation will define economic growth, national security, and America’s role in the global economy,” said PAC leaders Zac Moffatt and Josh Vlasto. They added that the group intends to actively support candidates who understand the strategic stakes of AI policy.

Although the PAC’s full donor and spending disclosures have not yet been released, it has already become active in competitive races. Leading the Future is opposing Alex Bores, a Democratic candidate in Manhattan who played a key role in advancing New York’s recently adopted AI law. At the same time, the group is backing Chris Gober, a Republican running for Congress in Texas.

The PAC has said it will support candidates from both parties, emphasizing policy alignment over partisanship.

Leading the Future is closely linked to advocacy group Build American AI, which recently launched a $10 million campaign aimed at promoting a uniform national AI framework.

Backers of the super PAC include Andreessen Horowitz, Greg Brockman, Joe Lonsdale, Ron Conway, and AI software company Perplexity.

With significant cash reserves and expectations of additional donations from the AI sector in 2026, the PAC is poised to play an outsized role in upcoming congressional races — and in the broader debate over how the U.S. governs one of its most strategically important technologies.