Senator Bernie Sanders is sounding a sharp alarm about the growing political power of Big Tech, warning that wealthy technology executives and investors are preparing to spend vast sums of money to shape U.S. elections—particularly to silence candidates who raise concerns about artificial intelligence and automation. In a forceful statement shared online, Sanders argued that the rise of AI has exposed a dangerous imbalance in American democracy, where billionaires can outspend voters and tilt the political playing field to protect their own interests.
“Big Tech oligarchs will spend hundreds of millions to defeat candidates who express concerns about AI and robotics,” Sanders wrote, linking the issue directly to campaign finance law. He said the trend underscores the urgent need to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision and move toward public funding of elections. “Billionaires cannot be allowed to buy elections,” he added.
Sanders’ warning comes as new reporting highlights how technology moguls—some with close ties to former President Donald Trump—are increasingly viewing upcoming midterm elections as a gateway to long-term political influence. According to the report, political organizations backed by tech investors and major companies, including Meta, are preparing to intervene heavily in the 2026 election cycle as lawmakers from both parties begin raising red flags about the societal and economic impacts of AI.
The convergence of these developments has reignited a long-simmering debate in Washington: who gets to decide how artificial intelligence is regulated, and whose voices are being drowned out by money.
AI has rapidly moved from a futuristic concept to a real-world force reshaping jobs, education, surveillance, warfare, and everyday life. While many policymakers agree the technology holds enormous potential, there is growing bipartisan anxiety about its risks—job displacement, data privacy violations, algorithmic bias, and the concentration of power in the hands of a few massive corporations.
Sanders and other critics argue that this is precisely why Big Tech is mobilizing politically. As calls for regulation grow louder, so does industry spending aimed at influencing elections and policy outcomes. “If candidates start asking tough questions about who controls AI, who profits from it, and who gets hurt,” one progressive policy analyst said, “that threatens the business model of some of the most powerful companies in the world.”
The Washington Post report suggests that tech-aligned political groups are not just focused on a single election, but on building durable power over time. By shaping midterm races, these groups hope to influence congressional committees, regulatory agencies, and future legislation governing AI, antitrust enforcement, and data privacy. The goal, critics say, is to lock in favorable rules before the public fully grasps the long-term consequences of the technology.
Sanders has framed this strategy as part of a broader pattern in American politics, where economic power increasingly translates into political power. Since the Citizens United ruling in 2010, corporations and wealthy individuals have been able to spend unlimited amounts of money through Super PACs and dark-money groups, often with little transparency. While supporters of the decision argue it protects free speech, Sanders and other reform advocates say it has effectively legalized corruption.
“This is not about Democrats versus Republicans,” Sanders has repeatedly argued. “This is about whether we have a democracy that responds to ordinary people, or an oligarchy run by billionaires.”
The involvement of tech leaders close to Trump has added another layer of controversy. Some of these figures have embraced a deregulatory agenda, arguing that government oversight will stifle innovation and allow foreign competitors to leap ahead. Others have aligned with Trump-era cultural and political battles, portraying AI regulation as part of a broader attack on business and free enterprise.
Yet even within the Republican Party, concerns about AI are growing. Lawmakers have raised questions about deepfakes in elections, national security risks, and the potential for mass job losses. That bipartisan unease makes the scale of tech-backed political spending especially sensitive, fueling fears that legitimate policy debates could be overwhelmed by advertising blitzes and well-funded primary challenges.
Public reaction to Sanders’ warning has been intense. Supporters praised him for calling out what they see as an uncomfortable truth about money and power in politics. “He’s saying what a lot of people feel,” said a labor organizer in Michigan. “We’re worried about our jobs being automated, and instead of listening, billionaires are trying to buy silence.”
Critics, however, accused Sanders of exaggerating the threat and demonizing an industry that has driven economic growth. Some tech advocates argue that political engagement by business leaders is legal and necessary to ensure informed policymaking. “Innovation doesn’t happen in a vacuum,” one industry spokesperson said. “Lawmakers need to hear from the people building these technologies.”
Still, the debate appears far from settled. As AI continues to advance at breakneck speed, pressure is mounting on Congress to act—whether on worker protections, transparency requirements, or limits on algorithmic power. At the same time, the sheer volume of money expected to flow into future elections raises fundamental questions about who will shape those decisions.
For Sanders, the issue goes beyond technology. It strikes at the core of democratic legitimacy. “If billionaires can use their wealth to crush candidates who challenge them,” he has warned, “then democracy becomes a slogan, not a reality.”
With the 2026 elections looming and AI regulation emerging as one of the defining policy battles of the decade, Sanders’ message is clear: the fight over artificial intelligence is also a fight over the future of American democracy—and it may already be underway.
Leave a Reply