Anthropic says it will spend $20 million to support U.S. political candidates who favor stronger artificial intelligence regulation, funding a political group called Public First Action that supports allowing U.S. states to establish their own AI regulations.

The announcement, made Thursday, comes as AI policy increasingly becomes part of U.S. election politics ahead of the midterms. By backing a group that supports stronger regulatory approaches, Anthropic’s decision highlights how AI companies are increasingly participating in debates over the rules that will govern how the technology is developed and deployed.

Anthropic’s contribution to Public First Action marks a notable development in how AI companies are engaging with policy. Rather than limiting involvement to public statements or lobbying, companies are now supporting political groups aligned with specific regulatory outcomes.

Public First Action focuses on protecting the ability of U.S. states to create their own AI laws, arguing that state-level oversight should remain part of the regulatory framework as the technology evolves. Anthropic said in its statement that companies developing AI have a responsibility to help ensure the technology serves the public interest, describing its decision as part of a safety-oriented approach.

One candidate supported by Public First Action is Marsha Blackburn, a Republican running for governor of Tennessee, who opposed a congressional effort that would have prevented states from passing their own AI laws — reflecting the group’s emphasis on preserving state-level regulatory authority.

Public First Action is described as a bipartisan organization led by both Republican and Democratic strategists. According to Anthropic’s announcement, the group supports policies including:

Anthropic said the effort is not intended to reduce scrutiny of AI developers, but to support governance approaches that include stronger oversight of frontier AI systems.

Anthropic also cited polling indicating that 69% of Americans believe government is not doing enough to regulate AI.

The contribution comes as lawmakers across the United States continue introducing or considering AI legislation, with several states already advancing their own rules around transparency, safety, and accountability.

Anthropic’s political spending comes amid growing differences within the AI sector over how regulation should evolve.

Two former members of Congress launched Public First Action late last year to counter another political group, Leading the Future, which generally opposes strict AI regulation. That organization is backed by prominent AI industry figures, including Greg Brockman, president of OpenAI, and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen. Andreessen’s firm, A16Z, is also an investor in OpenAI.

According to a spokesperson, Leading the Future has raised $125 million since its founding in August 2025, illustrating the scale of financial resources now flowing into AI policy debates.

The presence of competing groups underscores how AI companies hold differing views on governance, including approaches to risk, innovation speed, and compliance.

The timing of Anthropic’s announcement is notable as the United States heads toward midterm elections, where regulation of emerging technologies is expected to become a more visible campaign issue. As AI tools expand into consumer products, enterprise workflows, and public infrastructure, companies are increasingly engaging with policy discussions that may influence future development and deployment.

Rather than representing a new entry into politics for technology leaders, the moment reflects a more direct and organized form of political advocacy tied to AI policy outcomes.

Q: What did Anthropic announce?
A: Anthropic said it will donate $20 million to Public First Action, a political group supporting candidates who favor stronger AI regulation and state-level authority over AI laws.

Q: Who is Public First Action?
A: Public First Action is a political organization that opposes federal efforts to restrict states from passing their own AI regulations and supports candidates aligned with that position.

Q: Is this the first time AI companies have been involved in politics?
A: No. AI executives and technology companies have previously participated in political fundraising and advocacy. The significance here is the scale and direct focus on AI policy outcomes.

Q: What opposing perspective exists within the industry?
A: Leading the Future, a separate group backed by figures including Greg Brockman and Marc Andreessen, generally opposes strict AI regulation and has raised significant funding of its own.

Q: Why does this matter now?
A: As AI legislation accelerates across states and at the federal level, companies are increasingly trying to influence the rules that will shape future development and deployment.

Anthropic’s decision to fund a political group supporting stronger AI oversight highlights how AI companies are increasingly influencing not only technological development but also the regulatory frameworks that govern the industry.

Who should care: If you are an AI developer, enterprise leader, policy strategist, investor, or organization deploying AI systems at scale, this development may affect how you evaluate long-term compliance risk and market stability. Political spending tied directly to AI policy signals that future rules could be shaped as much by election outcomes as by technical progress.

Why it matters now: AI regulation is moving rapidly from policy discussion into active political debate as U.S. states consider new rules and federal lawmakers debate national standards. Companies are beginning to back opposing political organizations, reflecting differing views on how quickly AI should advance and how much oversight should accompany deployment.

What decision this affects: Organizations may need to start factoring regulatory uncertainty into product planning, investment decisions, and deployment timelines. Monitoring political and policy developments could become as important as tracking model performance or technical breakthroughs.

More broadly, governance is becoming an area of active competition within the AI industry. Companies are not only building AI systems but also participating in discussions that will influence how those systems operate within society.

The next phase of AI competition may depend as much on who helps shape the rules as on who builds the most capable models.

Editor’s Note: This article was created by Alicia Shapiro, CMO of AiNews.com, with writing, image, and idea-generation support from ChatGPT, an AI assistant. However, the final perspective and editorial choices are solely Alicia Shapiro’s. Special thanks to ChatGPT for assistance with research and editorial support in crafting this article.