Alex Bores says USD 100 Million AI Super PAC targeting him backfired
A $100 million AI‑focused Super PAC set its sights on New York Assembly member Alex Bores during his bid for Congress, pouring unprecedented sums into ads and outreach aimed at the Democratic hopeful. The campaign’s scale—more money than any single‑issue political group has ever spent in a state race—prompted observers to wonder whether the barrage would tilt the election. Bores, however, says the effort produced the opposite result, turning a massive spending push into a rallying point for his own message about technology policy.
While the PAC framed its investment as a push to shape regulation of “incredibly powerful technology,” the candidate argues the attack has amplified his call for broader oversight. In a recent WIRED interview, he acknowledges the unexpected fallout, noting that the partnership has sparked a conversation he believes should reach beyond partisan lines.
"I want to thank [the PAC] for their partnership in raising up the issue of how we regulate an incredibly powerful technology so that the future is one that benefits all of us," says Alex Bores, a New York Assembly member and Democratic congressional candidate, in an interview with WIRED. "I couldn't imagine a better partner this week." Earlier this year, Bores and New York state senator Andrew Gounardes coauthored the RAISE Act, a bill that would empower New York's attorney general to bring civil penalties of up to $30 million against AI developers like OpenAI and Google if they fail to publish safety reports around their technology.
Did the $100 million AI‑friendly super PAC achieve its goal, or simply hand Alex Bores a bigger platform? The PAC’s decision to spotlight the New York Assembly member sparked a surge of media coverage, something Bores himself acknowledges. “I want to thank [the PAC] for their partnership in raising up the issue of how we regulate an incredibly powerful technology so that the future is one that benefits all of us,” he said, noting the unexpected publicity.
Yet the candidate also suggests the move backfired, turning a strategic attack into a publicity boon for his own campaign. Because the PAC’s backing came from Silicon Valley donors, the episode highlights how money and algorithmic targeting intersect with electoral politics. Whether the attention translates into substantive policy debate remains uncertain; the article offers no data on legislative outcomes or voter shifts.
In short, the super PAC’s high‑profile targeting generated the very conversation it intended, but the longer‑term impact on regulation or electoral fortunes is still unclear.
Further Reading
- a16z-backed super PAC is targeting Alex Bores, sponsor of New York's AI safety bill. He says: Bring it on. - TechCrunch
- Billionaire-Funded AI Super PAC Picks Leading Safety Advocate as First Target - Common Dreams
- New York could be on the verge of a milestone AI safety bill - Tech Brew
- Author of New York AI 'safety' bill highlights industry super PAC opposition in congressional run - Inside AI Policy
- AI-focused PAC targets Alex Bores over regulation stance - Mezha
Common Questions Answered
How much money did the AI‑focused Super PAC spend on ads targeting Alex Bores?
The Super PAC poured a total of $100 million into advertisements and outreach aimed at New York Assembly member Alex Bores during his congressional campaign. This amount is unprecedented for a single‑issue political group in a state race.
What legislation did Alex Bores coauthor that relates to AI regulation?
Alex Bores coauthored the RAISE Act with New York state senator Andrew Gounardes. The bill is designed to empower New York's attorney general to oversee and regulate powerful AI technologies.
How did Alex Bores respond to the Super PAC’s massive spending against him?
Bores publicly thanked the Super PAC, saying it helped raise the issue of AI regulation and gave him a larger platform. He framed the spending as an unexpected partnership that highlighted the need for responsible AI policy.
Did the $100 million AI Super PAC achieve its intended political goal according to the article?
The article suggests the PAC’s effort may have backfired, turning the massive spending into a rallying point for Bores rather than diminishing his support. Observers are left questioning whether the PAC simply amplified his visibility without securing the desired electoral outcome.