Artificial Intelligence PACs Pour Millions Into an Overlooked Senate Contest

Tech money is flooding one of the most obscure Senate races in the country. Super PACs backed by Andreessen Horowitz and other tech investors have dumped nearly $1 million into the campaign of Mike Rounds, the Republican candidate in South Dakota’s Senate race. The spending is a signal of how much the AI industry cares about who writes the rules for its field.

Rounds leads independent candidate Brian Beng in recent polls. Democratic candidate Julian Beaudion dropped out last month. That leaves Rounds as the clear favorite, and the tech money is treating him as a lock. The question is not whether he wins, but what the industry gets in exchange.

Andreessen Horowitz Leads the Spending

Defend American Jobs, a super PAC funded by Andreessen Horowitz, has spent around $600,000 supporting Rounds. The PAC’s backing carries weight because Andreessen Horowitz sits at the center of Silicon Valley’s venture capital world. Its partners have backed some of the most valuable AI companies in existence, and the PAC’s spending shows they want a friendly voice in Washington.

The timing matters. AI regulation is expected to be a major priority in the next Congress, according to congressional aides familiar with the matter. Rounds is considered a top supporter of the AI industry by AI executives.

Anthropic, Google and Microsoft Chip In

Employees and super PACs connected to Anthropic, Google and Microsoft have contributed roughly $215,000 to Rounds’ campaign. That money comes from the companies themselves and from workers who want to shape the political conversation around AI. The total contribution from tech groups now exceeds what Rounds has raised from donors in South Dakota this cycle.

The pattern is consistent across the industry. Companies that build AI systems want a say in how they are governed. They have found a candidate who speaks their language.

The State’s Stance on Data Centers

South Dakota has shown mixed signals on the data center industry. The legislature passed a bill earlier this year requiring hyperscalers to pay a larger share of water and energy costs tied to data centers. That suggests the state wants to protect its resources from the demands of large-scale computing.

At the same time, the state legislature voted down tax breaks for data center equipment and software purchases earlier this year. That vote stalled Applied Digital’s planned development in the state. The two moves point in opposite directions, but they reflect the tension between economic gain and environmental concern.

The Meta Lobbying Connection

Robert Skjonsberg, Rounds’ senior aide and former chief of staff, lobbies for Meta before the South Dakota legislature. His position raises a question about whether Rounds is representing the interests of South Dakotans or the interests of Meta. The answer is not clear, and the candidate’s office has not answered the question directly.

Rounds’ office told Politico its general counsel consulted with the Senate ethics committee, which found no conflict of interest. That finding does not settle the matter for everyone. The committee’s role is to ensure compliance with existing rules, not to determine whether a relationship looks bad to the public.

What the Polls Show

A Gallup poll found that seven out of 10 Americans oppose data center development due to water and energy demands. That sentiment cuts against the industry’s push to expand. Rounds is positioned to balance those views, though the polling does not show how he would do so.

The race is not close. Rounds leads Beng in recent polls, and Beaudion’s exit removed the last serious challenge from the left. The tech money is betting on a win, and the stakes are high. Whoever controls the Senate will set the tone for how AI is regulated in the years ahead.

The OpenAI Fund and the Crypto Play

On Thursday, Leading the Future, funded by OpenAI president Greg Brockman, Ben Horowitz and Marc Andreesen, announced $2 million toward Senate Republicans supportive of AI or crypto. That fund operates separately from the Andreessen Horowitz-backed PAC, but the logic behind both is the same. The industry wants allies in power who will push back against regulation.

The split between the two funds matters for transparency. The Andreessen Horowitz-backed PAC spends openly on Rounds, while the OpenAI fund targets a wider group of Republicans. The combined spending shows the industry’s appetite for influence across multiple races.

What Rounds Gets Out of This

The arrangement is simple for Rounds: he gets money, and the industry gets a champion. The question is whether the public sees it that way. The ethics committee found no conflict, but that is not the same as public trust.

The state’s own data center policies complicate the picture further. The legislature’s decision to reject tax breaks for data center equipment and software purchases shows that South Dakota is not a blank slate for the industry. The state has standards, and the companies are working to meet them.

The Race’s Timeline

The race is not over, but the money has spoken. Rounds is the candidate with the industry’s ear, and the industry is not letting go.

Where the paper stands

The paper backs the small startup against Andreessen Horowitz and the other tech investors, and is against super PAC spending that treats a Senate seat as a down payment on favorable AI regulation. The pattern here is familiar: money from the biggest firms buys access, and the rest of the industry pays the price.

When the biggest firms ask to be regulated, the paper asks who those rules would lock out. Licensing regimes and compliance costs only giants can afford are a moat, not a safeguard. Andreessen Horowitz sits at the center of Silicon Valley’s venture capital world, and its PAC’s spending shows the industry wants a friendly voice in Washington — a voice that will speak for it when the rules are written.

The OpenAI fund operates separately from the Andreessen Horowitz-backed PAC, but the logic behind both is the same: the industry wants allies in power who will push back against regulation. The combined spending shows the industry’s appetite for influence across multiple races. The reader should watch for the same pattern elsewhere, where the biggest firms use campaigns as proxies for control rather than as opportunities for free speech.

Source material: “AI PACs Have Dumped Nearly $1 Million Into an Obscure Senate Race,” WIRED.

AI · elections · politics · tech policy · venture capital