The cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence industries have tested their impact in Illinois. Things didn’t go well

WASHINGTON (AP) — The artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency industries spent big and often lost in the Illinois primary this week, an early setback for tech companies trying to reshape the midterms and establish themselves as powerful players in American politics.

Corporations have flooded the state’s Democratic primaries with millions of dollars to boost candidates they thought had a light touch when it came to regulating technologies that are beginning to upend the way people do their jobs and manage their finances.

Using super PACs that were allowed to spend unlimited amounts of money, they ran TV ads and distributed campaign flyers that only occasionally alluded to their industries. Instead, the messages focused on promises to fight President Donald Trump’s administration and support liberal policies, a strategy used by other organizations such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

But this timid strategy did not prevent interventions from the AI ​​and cryptocurrency industries from becoming a lightning rod in the tumultuous Illinois primary, where there was a rare abundance of open seats that led to competitive races.

Cryptocurrency-backed political action committee Fairshake spent more than $10 million against Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton, who ultimately won the Democratic nomination to succeed Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

Read more: Illinois Governor Juliana Stratton wins the Democratic primary for the US Senate

Fairshake and Protect Progress, also linked to the cryptocurrency industry, spent millions more to unsuccessfully support Stratton’s two main rivals, US Reps. Raja Krishnamurthy and Robin Kelly, according to Federal Election Commission filings.

In the U.S. House primary in Illinois, campaign spending by technology-enabled groups had mixed results.

State Rep. LaShawn Ford, who supported state legislation regulating the artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency industries, won the Democratic primary to succeed U.S. Rep. Danny Davis. Fairshake spent nearly $2.5 million opposing Ford’s nomination in a race that included at least four other political groups spending against the progressive lawmaker or his opponents.

Meanwhile, Cook County Commissioner Donna Miller won the Democratic primary to succeed Kelly after Verchack spent more than $800,000 against state Sen. Robert Peters, another progressive who supported legislation to regulate the cryptocurrency industry.

This race has also seen disagreements among AI-powered spending.

The AI-powered Think Big PAC invested more than $1 million to boost the candidacy of Jesse Jackson Jr., the former congressman who pleaded guilty in a fraud scandal in 2013. But Jobs and Democracy, another AI-powered group, also racked up about $1 million in negative campaign spending against Jackson during the race.

Think Big is a subsidiary of Leading the Future, a policy group funded by top Silicon Valley executives, including venture capitalist Marc Andreessen. Andreessen opposes federal regulations on artificial intelligence, and has been a vocal supporter of the Republican president’s AI policies.

By contrast, the Jobs and Democracy PAC is funded by the AI ​​company Anthropic, which favors some safety regulations related to AI as the technology develops. Both PACs opposed progressive candidates who called for relatively stringent regulations on technology and higher taxes on wealthy Americans.

In a bright spot for the AI ​​industry, former Congresswoman Melissa Bean won the nomination to regain her old seat after a crowded and intense primary. Bean is backed by about $1 million in funding from AI-powered groups.

“It recognizes that the United States must work toward a national AI regulatory framework that creates jobs, helps us stay ahead of China, and protects the safety of children, users and society,” said Josh Vlasto, a political strategist at Leadership Future, an umbrella organization for policy groups concerned with artificial intelligence. “Future Leadership is proud to support their campaign and looks forward to working with leaders who will prioritize innovation over disruption.”

The cash infusion into Illinois races in the final stages totaled nearly $20 million across races and served as a declaration of political ambitions for both industries, raising the stakes in an already hotly contested primary.

“Corporate money is being used to portray corporate-backed candidates as courageous progressives,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a political group that works to elect anti-corporate progressives.

“The question for the Democratic Party is whether we elect people who actually believe in these positions or whether we elect hard-line candidates who talk about these values ​​but don’t support them in actual policy,” Green said.

Campaign finance experts and ordinary voters alike still grapple with the political influence wielded by the tech industry.

“They’re so new to the game that public opinion isn’t well formed around them,” said Brian Gaines, a political science professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. “You don’t get a clear signal about who is progressive and who is moderate on AI and cryptocurrency policies.”

“People are nervous about technology, but they don’t know what to think yet,” Gaines said.

Maya Swidler contributed to this report.