Congress

AI and crypto groups were among the biggest players in this year’s primaries. Here’s how they did.

Published

2 months ago

September 3, 2026

At least one in six members of the next Congress are all but certain to have made it there with the backing of the crypto industry or artificial intelligence interests.

A smattering of super PACs representing factions from those sectors spent a whopping $127 million across more than 100 primaries this year in an effort to shape the future of Congress — and won roughly 90 percent of them.

It’s a major influence play from a set of political players that went from not existing four years ago to being among the biggest spenders so far this cycle.

But behind the headline track record, the outcomes are more nuanced: Many of the groups’ victories were in effectively uncontested races in which they backed incumbents who did not face serious primary challenges.

In Republican primaries, the groups had a near-perfect track record, in large part because they usually aligned with endorsements from President Donald Trump. In Democratic contests, their records were more mixed: They racked up plenty of wins but also lost some high-profile races when they were up against each other or other moneyed groups — or when their spending itself became an issue in the race.

“Campaign finance is in such a Wild West, uncharted territory, and wealth is so obscene that they can spend this kind of money on politics,” said Cooper Teboe, a Silicon Valley-based Democratic consultant. “So I think we’re in truly deeply uncharted territory.”

The rapid growth of tech money aiming to influence politics and policymaking has created a complicated constellation of groups. Fairshake, a pro-cryptocurrency super PAC primarily funded by Coinbase, Ripple Labs and the venture capitalist firm Andreessen Horowitz, launched in the 2024 cycle and funds two other super PACs, one each supporting Democrats and Republicans.

Then came the AI super PACs this cycle, including Leading the Future, a pro-AI group funded by major industry executives including OpenAI’s Greg Brockman, which also backs both parties through two other super PACs. And Public First Action, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit whose backers include the firm Anthropic and bills itself as an AI regulation-focused counterweight to Leading the Future, helps fund two super PACs of its own.

And there are a smattering of other smaller PACs that spent in primaries too.

“Super PACs play a huge role in American politics, and not for the good,” said former Rep. Brad Carson (D-Okla.), who co-founded Public First Action last year. “The innovation that we had at Public First was rather than just complain about Leading the Future having a super PAC, we were like, ‘OK, we will regrettably fight fire with fire.’”

The eye-popping spending comes as voters and party leaders continue to grapple with the emerging technology, with battles over AI regulation and data centers front and center ahead of November’s midterm elections.

The super PACs have scaled up quickly as the industries have grown rapidly and created a new class of tech billionaires flush with cash they can spend on politics. The new spenders largely have not fallen along traditional partisan or ideological lines, but sought to boost lawmakers on both sides of the aisle that they see as aligned with their legislative interests — or oust those who have gone against their priorities.

“For our organization, we said we were going to show up and show up at scale, and we did,” said Josh Vlasto, who worked for Fairshake last cycle and now helps run Leading the Future, the network of super PACs funded by AI executives and investors that advocates for the expansion of the technology.

“We wanted to show up for candidates in primaries, particularly ones that were being attacked on issues related to AI or had a really strong position on AI,” he said.

For most of the groups, the primaries are expected to just be a warmup. Fairshake and its affiliates had just shy of $123 million in the bank at the end of July, according to the most recent campaign finance reports. Last cycle, that network of crypto groups spent $87 million across more than two dozen House and Senate races for the general election.

Among the group’s wins: A Fairshak-network PAC put $12 million behind GOP Rep. Barry Moore’s Senate campaign, seeing him through a six-way primary after Trump also endorsed him. The crypto group also helped boost Rep. Christian Menefee (D-Texas) in a member-on-member primary against Rep. Al Green, and also got its preferred candidates to replace two retiring Democrats, with Adrian Boafo winning the primary for Rep. Steny Hoyer’s seat in Maryland and Jasmine Clark set to replace the late Rep. David Scott in Georgia.

“We’re just getting started building the largest pro-crypto Congress in history,” Fairshake spokesperson Geoff Vetter said in a statement.

Most of the races where the groups spent heavily in primaries will not be competitive in the general election, meaning the candidates that made it through are all but certain to be in Congress next year. Just over half of candidates who got a boost from cryptocurrency or AI-linked super PACs in their primaries were running in open seats, while a bit over 40 percent were incumbents and a handful were challengers.

The vast majority of incumbents easily win their primaries, and those who got backing from crypto or AI groups largely also won by healthy margins, making it hard to attribute their victory to the PACs. One notable exception was Rep. Valerie Foushee (D-N.C.), who warded off a primary challenger by roughly 1 percentage point after getting $1.6 million in backing from Jobs and Democracy PAC, a Public First affiliate.

Some of the biggest losses for both the cryptocurrency and AI groups came in their highest-profile races where they spent the most — and where the fact they were spending at all also became itself a campaign issue.

In Michigan’s 13th District, Rep. Shri Thanedar, a vocal cryptocurrency proponent, lost his seat despite Fairshake’s $2 million spent in the race. In Illinois, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi lost a Democratic Senate primary despite nearly $10 million in spending from Fairshake. (His opponent, Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton, slammed him for being supported by a “MAGA-backed crypto PAC.”)

“If they’re spending against you, you are in a good position for reelection because you’re clearly where popular opinion is,” said Teboe, the Silicon Valley-based Democratic strategist.

No race attracted as much tech money and attention as New York’s 12th District, where Jobs and Democracy PAC and two smaller groups came head-to-head with Think Big, a Leading the Future affiliate. The four groups combined spent nearly $25 million, with Think Big opposing New York Assemblymember Alex Bores’ campaign, while the other three groups supported him.

Bores, who had championed the Raise Act, an AI safety and regulation bill in the state Legislature, ultimately lost to Micah Lasher — though Lasher is also an AI critic, making the result hardly a win for the industry. The race and AI-backed spending also significantly raised Bores’ profile as a critic of the industry.

“Lasher is a co-sponsor of the Raise Act and harsher on the AI sector than Alex Bores was, and by choosing to fight in New York City, and making it their mission to destroy Alex, they made him into a national hero,” said Carson, who leads Public First, the group behind Jobs and Democracy PAC.

The Manhattan congressional race also laid bare the competing goals of the dueling AI-backed super PACs. Public First focuses on advocating for AI regulation, Carson noted, arguing that it should be excluded from Blue Light News’s tally of crypto and AI spending. The group is bankrolled in part by $40 million in donations from Anthropic.

Bores described the AI industry’s political spending this cycle as a new effort to persuade public opinion that immediately fell flat with voters.

“Social media came on the scene and everyone’s like, ‘Oh, Arab Spring! It’s gonna lead to democracy! It’s gonna save the world!’” Bores said in an interview. The AI industry “started from the jump, realizing they were deeply, deeply, deeply unpopular, and the only way that their policy choices would be implemented is if they could drown out the voice of the American people with money.”

The Leading the Future affiliates spent in nearly a dozen primaries since New York, winning all of them. The groups boosted candidates including Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), who faced a progressive primary challenger in a seat altered by redistricting, and Democrats Jeremy Moss and Dan Koh in open seats in Michigan and Massachusetts, along with Republicans such as South Carolina Sen. Darline Graham and Wyoming Rep. Harriet Hageman, who is running for Senate.

Compared to hotly contested general elections, which can attract tens of millions in spending for House races and hundreds for Senate races, primaries are relatively affordable for outside groups, said Rich Barton, a senior research fellow at Unite America, a group that advocates for reforms to the primary process. Still, the scale of the spending seen in some of the open-seat primaries this year was new.

“There’s not a precedent for the more than $10 million that we’ve seen a single entity spend in a single primary,” Barton said.

Congress

Johnson’s meeting request

Published

6 hours ago

November 6, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Sen. Ron Johnson is sending a letter Monday requesting a conference meeting to discuss the midterm results and a delay in the leadership election.

Johnson has gathered enough signatures to force the meeting under the Senate GOP’s rules and is proposing the gathering for 9 a.m. Tuesday.

“Tuesday’s result was a stunning defeat,” Johnson and his backers write in the letter to Conference Chair Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO. “Holding leadership elections without engaging in a robust discussion and evaluation of how those running for leadership intend to lead would be political malpractice”

Republicans still expect their leadership election to be held Tuesday, where Majority Leader John Thune is so far unopposed to lead the party next year in the minority.

Congress

Chris Murphy released from hospital after stroke

Published

8 hours ago

November 6, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Sen. Chris Murphy announced Friday that he has been released from the hospital after suffering a stroke last week, but will miss “several weeks” of Senate votes while he continues to recover.

“The doctors are very encouraged by the progress I’ve made so far,” the Connecticut Democrat said in a statement. “In order to take my recovery seriously and get back to work on the quickest timeline possible, I will be spending several weeks at a rehabilitation center after being discharged from the hospital today.”

He added that he remains in touch remotely with his staff and colleagues.

Murphy, who was hospitalized last weekend, said Friday that he was “diagnosed with a small bleed in the thalamus region of my brain.” Jose Suarez, the Chief of Neurosciences Critical Care at The Johns Hopkins Hospital, said in a separate statement released by Murphy’s office that the senator “experienced a small hemorrhagic stroke.”

“He has shown tremendous progress, and at the current rate of improvement, we expect that he will make a full recovery following rehabilitation,” Suarez added.

Murphy is the latest senator to suffer a stroke in recent years. Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.) were both hospitalized for strokes in 2022. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), at that time a Senate candidate, also had a stroke in 2022 that he later described as near fatal.

Congress

Congressional Progressive Caucus chair lays out strategy to ‘wield our power’

Published

8 hours ago

November 6, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus said his group will still be power brokers in a massive Democratic majority in a strategy memo previewing plans for next term.

“While some in the press have speculated that a majority of this size undermines our influence within the caucus, they have it exactly backwards,” Rep. Greg Casar of Texas said in the Friday memo obtained by Blue Light News. “Big majorities are good for getting big things done. Our goal is not to win a battle against other Democratic caucuses. It is to pass longstanding progressive priorities that bring down costs, root out corruption, and boost wages.”

The CPC will have at least 105 members next term, according to the memo. If Democrats had a narrow majority, progressives — and any other faction in the caucus — could have used their votes as leverage. Now that presumptive speaker Hakeem Jeffries will have as many 30 votes to spare, Democrats broadly are recalibrating their approach next term.

Casar laid out a “three-pronged” strategy for the CPC to “wield our power” in the three-page memo — tackling legislation, oversight and “holding Donald Trump to his word on populist economic policies.”

“Small majorities give corporate special interest groups the ability to block popular populist policies by recruiting a small number of opponents; a big majority gives us the advantage,” he said.

Casar previewed how the CPC can engage with Trump, noting that “one of the few bright spots for bipartisan lawmaking” was a housing bill that banned private equity firms from buying homes. He noted the caucus should push Trump to cap credit card interest rates, lower credit card fees for small businesses and lower prescription drug costs.

“While we oppose [Trump] strongly on the vast majority of fronts, we should send bills to his desk that would lower prices and raise paychecks. If he signs them, good. If he vetoes those bills, that will propel us to a continued Democratic majority and a trifecta where a Democratic president can sign these proposals into law,” he said.

Casar also outlined oversight targets beyond the administration, urging Democrats to specifically investigate corporations that use customer data for “surveillance pricing,” health care companies that are “taking advantage of seniors” through the Medicare Advantage program and artificial intelligence labs who are “putting jobs and lives at risk.”

“By focusing not just on the Trump administration but also on big corporations and billionaires, we will show the American people we are not just anti-Trump but also pro-worker and pro-consumer,” he said.