Silicon Valley Is Spending Millions to Stop One of Its Own

Summary

Alex Bores, a New York Assembly member and former Palantir engineer, is running in a crowded Democratic primary for Congress. Bores has positioned himself as a tech-literate regulator: he co‑sponsored New York’s RAISE Act (2025), which forces the largest AI firms to publish safety plans, disclose major incidents and submit to state oversight. That stance has made him a target of a well‑funded super PAC called Leading the Future—backed by figures including OpenAI’s Greg Brockman, Palantir cofounder Joe Lonsdale and Andreessen Horowitz—which has spent millions on ads, mailers and texts to derail his campaign.

Bores left Palantir over concerns about its contracts with ICE under the Trump administration and has since worked on startups focused on public‑interest tech. He argues for bipartisan, practical AI regulation covering safety, labour impacts, data privacy, export controls and protections for children. The article is an interview that explores his tech background, why lawmakers often lack technical literacy, the political pressure from industry money, and the practical policy details he’s proposing.

Key Points

A Silicon Valley super PAC, Leading the Future, is spending heavily to oppose Alex Bores because of his advocacy for strong AI regulation.
Bores worked at Palantir but resigned when he objected to expanding its ICE work; he now emphasises tech for public good.
The RAISE Act requires the largest AI developers to publish and follow safety plans, report critical incidents and supports a state oversight body.
The PAC argues regulation will harm innovation and US competitiveness; Bores says safety and innovation often go hand in hand and export controls can coexist with regulation.
Bores aims for bipartisan coalitions on AI rules, citing broad public concern about kids, labour impacts and trustworthiness of AI systems.
The PAC’s attacks have paradoxically raised voter awareness of AI policy and made the race a bellwether for tech‑policy politics.
Bores also supports measures like platform interoperability (Digital Choice Act) and stronger built‑in cybersecurity checks for developer tools.

Why should I read this?

Because this isn’t just another campaign drama — it’s where tech cash meets lawmaking. If you care about how AI gets regulated (or who gets to write the rules), this race is a loud, messy preview. Plus: juicy bits about Palantir, ICE, and the weirdness of getting attack mail about yourself in the postbox. Short version: industry is spending big to protect its playbook; Bores is trying to stop them. Worth a skim if you like politics, policy or tech tea.

Context and relevance

This interview matters because it illustrates a growing fight between industry money and state‑level regulation of frontier AI. New York’s RAISE Act is an early example of subnational regulation that targets the biggest AI players; federal policy remains patchy. The tactics used by the super PAC show how venture capital and platform executives are increasingly willing to deploy political dollars to defend business models. For readers following AI safety, labour impacts, data privacy or the geopolitics of tech, this piece highlights both concrete policy proposals and the political pressures that shape whether those proposals succeed.