Artificial intelligence firms and their executives are increasingly utilizing financial influence and legislative lobbying to shape the regulatory landscapes of the United States and Australia.

人工智慧公司及其高階主管正日益利用財務影響力與立法遊說，以塑造美國與澳洲的監管格局。

In the United States, a strategic shift in corporate engagement is evident as AI entities adopt a political methodology previously utilized by the cryptocurrency sector. This is manifested in the deployment of super PACs funded by entities linked to OpenAI and Anthropic, which have expended over $37 million to influence the 2026 midterm congressional elections. These expenditures reflect a fundamental divergence in regulatory preferences: OpenAI advocates for exclusive federal oversight, whereas Anthropic supports more stringent, state-level regulations. This ideological friction is exemplified in the New York congressional primary for the seat of Jerry Nadler, where both networks have invested millions in opposing or supporting candidate Alex Bores based on his sponsorship of the RAISE Act, a transparency mandate for AI safety protocols.

在美國，企業參與方式出現了明顯的策略轉向，AI 實體採取了先前加密貨幣部門所使用的政治手段。這體現於由與 OpenAI 和 Anthropic 相關實體資助的超級政治行動委員會（super PACs）的運作，這些委員會已支出超過 3,700 萬美元以影響 2026 年的國會中期選舉。這些支出反映了監管偏好的根本分歧：OpenAI 主張由聯邦政府統一監管，而 Anthropic 則支持更嚴格的州級監管。這種意識形態的摩擦在紐約州 Jerry Nadler 席位的國會初選中尤為明顯，兩個網絡均投入數百萬美元反對或支持候選人 Alex Bores，原因在於他贊助了要求 AI 安全協定透明度的《RAISE 法案》。

Parallelly, the physical infrastructure required for AI—specifically data centers—has emerged as a focal point of socio-political contention. In the U.S., this is observed in Utah's 3rd Congressional District, where the environmental and resource implications of data center construction have become central to candidate platforms. Similarly, in Australia, the Albanese government faces a multifaceted challenge as populist and progressive factions converge on the issue. Pauline Hanson has emphasized the potential for labor displacement, while the Greens and Independent Senator David Pocock have raised concerns regarding the ecological strain on water and power supplies. Former Minister Ed Husic has characterized the current governmental approach as 'tech permissive,' suggesting that a failure to address public anxiety regarding job security and resource allocation may result in significant political instability.

與此同時，AI 所需的實體基礎設施——特別是數據中心——已成為社會政治爭論的焦點。在美國，這在猶他州第三國會選區中有所體現，數據中心建設對環境與資源的影響已成為候選人政綱的核心。同樣地，在澳洲，Albanese 政府面臨著多方面的挑戰，因為民粹主義與進步派陣營在該議題上趨於一致。Pauline Hanson 強調了勞動力被取代的可能性，而綠黨與獨立參議員 David Pocock 則對水電供應的生態壓力表示擔憂。前部長 Ed Husic 將目前的政府方針形容為「對科技過於寬容」，暗示若未能解決公眾對工作保障與資源分配的焦慮，可能會導致嚴重的政治不穩定。

The intersection of AI development and political power is currently characterized by high-capital electoral interventions in the U.S. and growing grassroots opposition to infrastructure expansion in Australia.

AI 發展與政治權力的交集，目前其特徵在於美國的高資本選舉干預，以及澳洲對基礎設施擴張日益增長的草根反對。