Congressional lawmakers and candidates on both sides of the aisle say they oppose unrestricted development of AI models and the building of AI data centers in their districts. A review of campaign finance records shows that as bipartisan opposition to it mounts, so does campaign spending on it.
Candidates running for House and Senate seats spent nearly $54,000 on AI products through mid-August, according to a Straight Arrow review of the latest campaign finance records. The tally is likely an undercount of how widely AI products are used on campaigns, since workers and volunteers may have personal AI accounts, or use of digital products that have built-in AI features, like the transcription service Otter and social video editor CapCut.
Most campaigns that listed AI-related expenses said they paid for ChatGPT, as well as other large language models that campaigns reported using, like Claude, Gemini, Grok, and AI-powered apps like video editor Descript, presentation and website builder Gamma AI, and data analyzer Scale.
Concerns across the aisle
The move comes as lawmakers navigate AI issues on the campaign trail and in Washington. President Donald Trump’s pollster recently released a memo describing how Republicans can acknowledge voters’ concerns about AI and data centers, while also allowing for its development, which the president strongly supports.
Rep. Ted Lieu of California, the fourth-ranking Democrat, pushed back when a reporter asked Wednesday if AI companies were overstating the threat posed by their products in order to control how lawmakers regulate the industry.
Lieu, whose campaign spent more than $650 on ChatGPT and Claude, described a recent episode where generative agents escaped control, elected a leader, and even had “kamikaze agents” retrieve information for the group, “and you think OpenAI made all this s— up as a regulatory capture scheme? Then you are just blinded by profit and partisanship.” Lieu said AI makers understand “they are creating products that they’ve lost control of and are not safe.”
ChatGPT
More than $20,000 of that was spent on ChatGPT by 39 candidates for House and Senate seats. The Washington Post, which earlier reported the number of candidates paying for ChatGPT, noted the company that makes ChatGPT prohibits customers from using it to create ads with “political content.”
Most campaigns described the ChatGPT expenses as “Software,” or “subscription,” though there is plenty of evidence that campaigns, and those supporting them, are creating lots of “political content” with AI products.
Of those 39 candidates, 23 were Democrats, who spent more than $8,800; and 16 were Republicans, who spent nearly $11,600.
The campaign of Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., said it was used for “meeting notes.” Democrat Jazmin Robinson, who lost a primary in Illinois in March, used ChatGPT for “research and communication.” Communication can mean any number of things, from social media posts, emails to voters, notes to donors or internal memos. Robinson did not immediately respond to a direct message on Instagram.
Claude
Nearly $16,000 was spent on Claude, made by Anthropic. Of those, 20 were Democrats who spent a little more than $9,000 and seven were Republicans who spent nearly $6,500. Independent Senate candidate Seth Bodnar of Montana spent about $1,200 on Claude.
Two candidates reported paying for “Grok”: Democrat Mari Hurabiell of California, who paid $20, and Republican Bricoe Cain of Texas, who paid $600.
Only one candidate reported paying for video-maker Midjourney: Republican Sholdon Daniels, who lost his primary in May for a House seat in Texas. His campaign spent nearly $900 on Midjourney, for “systems and software,” but lately he has been using Grok to make content.
“Why is AI considered to be the modern day nuclear bomb?” Daniels wrote Wednesday. He added: “I used grok build to create a cool SaaS business, and I just got my first paying customer!”
