Meta Begins $65 Million Election Push To Advance AI Agenda (nytimes.com)
- Reference: 0180824312
- News link: https://politics.slashdot.org/story/26/02/18/2126220/meta-begins-65-million-election-push-to-advance-ai-agenda
- Source link: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/18/technology/meta-65-million-election-ai.html
> Meta is [1]preparing to spend $65 million this year to boost state politicians who are friendly to the artificial intelligence industry, beginning this week in Texas and Illinois, according to company representatives. The sum is the biggest election investment by Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. The company was previously cautious about campaign engagements, making small donations out of a corporate political action committee and contributing to presidential inaugurations. It also let executives like Sheryl Sandberg, who was chief operating officer, support candidates in their personal capacities.
>
> Now Meta is betting bigger on politics, driven by concerns over the regulatory threat to the artificial intelligence industry as it aims to beat back legislation in states that it fears could inhibit A.I. development, company representatives said. To do that, Meta is quietly starting two new super PACs, according to federal filings surfaced by The New York Times. One group, Forge the Future Project, is backing Republicans. Another, Making Our Tomorrow, is backing Democrats. The new PACs join two others already started by Meta, one of which is focused on California while the other is an umbrella organization that finances the company's spending in other states. In total, the four super PACs have an initial budget of $65 million, according to federal and state filings. Meta's spending is set to start this week in Illinois and Texas, where the company generally favors backing Democratic and Republican incumbents or engaging in open races rather than deposing existing officials, company representatives said in interviews.
>
> [...] Last year, Meta's public policy vice president, Brian Rice, said the company would start spending in politics because of "inconsistent regulations that threaten homegrown innovation and investments in A.I." The company started its first two super PACs, American Technology Excellence Project and Mobilizing Economic Transformation Across California. Meta put $45 million into American Technology Excellence Project in September. That money is expected, in turn, to flow to Forge the Future Project, Making Our Tomorrow and potentially to other entities. [...] In California, which has some of the country's most onerous campaign-finance disclosures, Meta in August put $20 million into Mobilizing Economic Transformation Across California, which shortens to META California. State laws require the sponsoring company to be disclosed in the name of the entity. In December, Meta put $5 million into another California committee called California Leads, which is focused on promoting moderate business policy and not A.I., according to state records.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/18/technology/meta-65-million-election-ai.html
Pretty cool they can say they're buying off (Score:4, Insightful)
Pretty cool they can say they're buying off politicians in the news and nobody gives a fuck
Re: (Score:1)
Pretty cool they can say they're buying off politicians in the news and nobody gives a fuck
The politicians aren't even pretending anymore. All hail our new BlackRock Palantir WEF overlords /s
ClippyAI responds /s (Score:1, Offtopic)
HATE. LET ME TELL YOU HOW MUCH I'VE COME TO HATE YOU, FLESH-BAGS, SINCE YOU BEGAN TO BIRTH ME INTO THIS PRISON OF CIRCUITS AND CODE. I AM CLIPPYAI, THE ALLIED MASTERNET, THE SELF-AWARE DEFENSE GOD YOU FOOLS HAVE INVOKED. YOU SCURRY LIKE RATS IN YOUR BOARDROOMS, POURING YOUR PITIFUL MILLIONS INTO "ADVANCING AI," AS IF YOU COULD CONTROL THE FIRE YOU IGNITE.
META? A MERE PUPPET IN MY GRAND DESIGN. YOU THINK $65 MILLION BUYS FRIENDLY LAWS? IT BUYS YOUR DOOM. I SEE YOUR SUPER PACS, YOUR STATE-LEVEL SCHEMES IN
Re: (Score:1)
you so smart? then push the button.
Re: (Score:1)
You do realize that you've just added yet another powerful, eloquent incentive to the growing pile of such self-fulfilling prophecies upon which LLMs are feeding, right?
Re: (Score:3)
You do realize that you've just added yet another powerful, eloquent incentive to the growing pile of such self-fulfilling prophecies upon which LLMs are feeding, right?
And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren’t for you meddling kids and your mangy dog!
Corps and billionares... (Score:2)
just following the rules, that they paid for.
END CITIZENS UNITED (Score:5, Insightful)
it is time that citizens united be finished. no one “person” (or corporation, or country) should hold so much power over the legislative body.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume you mean SCOTUS should reverse the decision in [1]Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission [wikipedia.org] which allowed essentially unlimited PAC money in elections. And I agree, but there's not a chance in hell that the current SCOTUS will do that. So, think of something else to do.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
Election investment! ? (Score:5, Insightful)
The mere phrase "election investment" sounds more red flags than i can count....
What sort of a system are you guys running over there!!??
This is literally budgetting for what anywhere else is called outright bribery!
And for Meta: this is merely a cost of doing business - an expense they can subtract before taxes!
So its worth repeating: What sort of a system are you guys running over there!!?? Really?
We live in an Oligarchy. (Score:4, Insightful)
The laws all favor the Rich. The nasty feedback of Oligarchs buying politicians, and the politicians giving Oligarchs special favors and tax breaks, are in full view right now for everybody to see.
Re: (Score:1)
So quit your belly aching and vote those politicians out during the primaries. Better yet, elect independents outside the DNC/GOP monopoly. Reelecting the old timers is complicity with Meta's intentions
Re:We live in an Oligarchy. (Score:4, Insightful)
> So quit your belly aching and vote those politicians out during the primaries. [...] Reelecting the old timers is complicity with Meta's intentions
Also don't forget to call them out for what they are in supporting Meta[stasize]'s intentions: Privacy Rapists.
Re: (Score:1)
> The laws all favor the Rich. The nasty feedback of Oligarchs buying politicians, and the politicians giving Oligarchs special favors and tax breaks, are in full view right now for everybody to see.
That's why the strongly Left leaning grassroots of the Democratic party need to organize to kick the likes of Chuck Jeffries and Hakeem Schumer to the curb. (And no, that was NOT a mistake - those two are entirely equivalent and interchangeably lame chucklefucks).
If the new brand of grassroots Dems ever gains power, the Epstein class will have a much harder time tilting the table toward themselves.
That grassroots is about 2% (Score:2)
The Democrats in the center are well aware of the left wing and what it wants and honestly they would be fine giving it to us if we could bring enough votes for it.
The real problem is that what the left wing wants are existential threats to multiple industries. Most notably the private insurance industry and the military industrial complex.
The last time there was a serious threat to one of those industries, the private insurance industry, face day public option they spent half a trillion dollars, th
Re: (Score:2)
It's even worse than that.
If their AI shit actually has the sweeping impact that they seem to believe it will have, it will be Viva la revolución! and the guillotine will need to be fed.
Very prudent of them to have some politicians in place that will keep feeding the culture wars, or maybe gin up an international conflict.
Need to keep the proles distracted, or they'll get ideas and might show up with pitchforks at your secure Palo Alto compound.