The ongoing debate over AI regulation in New York's 12th District is a fascinating case study in the unintended consequences of corporate spending in elections. The race between Alex Bores and Micah Lasher has become a proxy war for the broader AI debate, with both sides leveraging the technology's influence to their advantage. However, the high-profile attacks and counter-spending have also drawn in unexpected allies and raised questions about the effectiveness of these strategies.
One of the most intriguing aspects of this race is the role of AI itself. Bores, a state assemblymember and critic of data analytics company Palantir, has fully embraced the "AI guy" label. His sponsorship of the RAISE Act, a landmark law to establish guardrails for AI, has attracted attention and drawn the ire of the powerful AI industry. Think Big, a super PAC backed by leaders at OpenAI and Andreessen Horowitz, has been spending heavily to promote Bores, but their efforts have also prompted counter-spending from pro-Bores entities linked to Anthropic, a company with a more favorable view of regulation.
The unyielding focus on AI has also attracted unlikely progressive allies like Our Revolution, a group founded by Sen. Bernie Sanders. This dynamic is not unique to New York; it is occurring in other races across the country as leaders in artificial intelligence, cryptocurrency, and other emerging industries look to exert their influence in elections at a critical moment, as lawmakers debate how aggressively to regulate the rapidly evolving technologies.
However, the spending can have unintended consequences. Tiffany Muller, president of End Citizens United, a group that supports campaign finance reform, notes that voters are paying attention to outside groups and are looking at their arguments with skepticism. In a highly-educated electorate like New York's 12th District, voters are likely to take a closer look at the attacks, especially as the general public has a mixed view of AI and is cautious of the technology.
The sheer size and scale of the spending from these particular industries are dwarfed by anything we have ever seen before, according to Muller. This has led to a sense of anger among voters about a rigged government system whose policy outcomes are helping the folks who are already at the top. Bores' allies approve of the strategy to lean into the AI debate, arguing that it is helping them build a broad coalition that includes union support and progressives.
However, the high-profile attacks are also raising questions about the effectiveness of these strategies. Bores' supporters are defensive and nervous about anything that pierces the veneer that he is a victim, according to Josh Vlasto, a spokesperson for Think Big and its affiliated group, Leading the Future. They argue that any support for Bores is due to direct financial investments made by Anthropic and its investors, and that the attacks are simply an attempt to discredit the candidate.
Despite the high-profile attacks, Bores is still facing a tough race. He is up against Lasher, who has a long history in New York politics and the backing of prominent Democrats. Kennedy family scion Jack Schlossberg and former Republican George Conway, both of whom are first-time candidates with high name recognition, are also in the mix. Public polling in the race is scarce, but internal polls show a tight race with Bores narrowly in the lead.
The final weeks of the campaign are likely to be crucial, with the city's progressive standard-bearer, Mayor Zohran Mamdani, potentially getting involved. While Bores has often mentioned that he and Mamdani were basketball buddies in Albany, there haven't been significant signs that Mamdani will play in the race. However, Bores' message is crossing ideological lines, and his willingness to challenge corporate power is appealing to a significant segment of the progressive electorate.
In the end, the race in New York's 12th District is a fascinating case study in the unintended consequences of corporate spending in elections. The high-profile attacks and counter-spending have drawn in unexpected allies and raised questions about the effectiveness of these strategies. Ultimately, the outcome of the race will depend on the ability of the candidates to build a broad coalition and address the concerns of the electorate.
