Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
from Jeremiah KimmelmanCalMatters
!["A]("https://i0.wp.com/calmatters.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/091824_Dreamforce_FM_CM_16.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1")
This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.
As California prepares for high-stakes elections this year, including an open race for governor, major companies focused on artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency have invested more than $39 million to influence state politics in 2025, according to a CalMatters analysis.
The companies contributed that money to political campaigns, hired lobbyists to influence policy and donated to nonprofits at the request of lawmakers. In all cases, critics say, the companies have used their money to build relationships that give them enormous influence over the legislative process. The companies themselves say they support candidates and policies that align with their corporate priorities.
Tech giants are raising costs
Last July, Meta, which made $201 billion in revenue last year, funneled $20 million to a new political committee it created to support candidates in favor of fewer AI regulations. A month later, the company gave the California Democratic Party $150,000 and a bipartisan group of 20 incumbents in the California Legislature up to $5,900 each.
“There’s a question of why (tech companies) have to spend so much money,” said Catherine Bracey, founder of the TechEquitya nonprofit organization in favor of artificial intelligence regulations that spent nearly $200,000 advocating on government issues last year. “And that’s because they’re on the wrong side of history and people don’t like them very much.”
When contacted, Metta sent a statement saying the money was “to help elect political candidates in California — regardless of party affiliation — who support and protect America’s technology industry.” The parent company of social media apps Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram spent nearly $30 million last year to influence politics in California. Part of that effort included donations of more than $25 million to 44 committees.
In one example, Meta and Google contributed $5 million each to “California Leads,” committee funded exclusively by the couple along with SV Angel, a venture capital firm. Late last year, the committee said it had more than $9.5 million in cash to spend on the upcoming election. In addition to contributing directly to election campaigns, the companies also spent millions of dollars to push their case directly to lawmakers and regulators. Meta which is public for his political push against AI regulations across the country, has spent at least $4.6 million lobbying state officials, far more than any other year since he began advocating in Sacramento in 2010.
!["Meta]("https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/O96oN/full.png")
That's because California is currently in the early stages of regulating AI, said Sean McMorris of Common Cause California, a nonprofit focused on government transparency. "These industries are going to pump a lot of money into shaping these policies in their ... favor."
The fight over whether to regulate artificial intelligence, or how it should be done, doesn't seem to be going away this year. Since the current legislative session began in December 2024. more than 50 grand which regulate AI are considered according to CalMatters Digital Democracy Database.
The federal legislative impasse and President Donald Trump's a hostile stance towards AI regulation mean that California, where Democrats have a supermajority in the legislature, is one of the places where such provisions could happen.
Meta isn't the only company spending on possible AI legislation.
Google, whose parent company Alphabet generates about $403 billion in revenue in 2025, spent more than $3.5 million on lobbying related to "tech budget funding and generative artificial intelligence" that year, though it was less than $10 million Google spent last year repeal the AI regulations and the Journalism Funding Bill.
OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, first began lobbying California officials in 2024, when it spent nearly $140,000. In 2025, the company spent more than $155,000. Meanwhile, Anthropic, maker of the popular large-tongue model Claude, spent more than $200,000 lobbying state officials last year, the first year it reported such spending.
Meta and Google also contributed to nonprofits directly at the request of California officials in so-called warrant payments. Meta made 34 payments totaling $1,245,000 at the request of California officials, including Gov. Gavin Newsom and a bipartisan group of lawmakers in both chambers.
"These transparent and public donations to independent nonprofits and charities do not influence the governor's or any state's decision-making," said Izzy Gordon, Newsom's spokeswoman.
Google made one payment in June 2025 worth $10,000 at the request of Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, author of Senate Bill 53which imposed some requirements on the creators of large AI models.
Wiener's office did not respond to requests for comment.
Crypto companies spend currency
While well-known AI companies have been increasing their spending in recent years, a new tech player is also buying influence across the country: the cryptocurrency industry.
Cryptocurrency Super PAC two years ago spent $10 million on ads against Democrat Katie Porter in the US Senate primary. Last year, Coinbase, which facilitates cryptocurrency transactions, and A16Z, one of the world's largest venture capital funds with financial stakes in cryptocurrency companies, spent a record amount on government lobbying: $200,000 and $300,000, respectively.
Recently, two crypto billionaires it became clear that they plan to spend tens of millions of dollars in state politics.
Last year was a relatively big year for Coinbase's government political operations. The company has contributed $155,000 to campaigns, including $60,000 to the California Democratic Party and $60,000 to corporate political action committee. He also made pledge payments for the first time, spending $95,000 at the request of five lawmakers -- three Democrats and two Republicans.
Coinbase did not respond to requests for comment.
So what can $39 million buy?
"It sounds like a lot of money, it's a lot of money, but in state politics it's not a huge amount of money," said Jim Ross, a campaign consultant who has worked on more than 100 campaigns in California over 30 years.
But $39 million puts tech at the top of the money-vs.-influence rankings along with the oil and gas industry, which is historical one of the biggest spenders. Last year, fossil fuel companies spent nearly $34 million lobbying the state, according to an analysis by Politico, and $5.3 million in campaign contributions, according to a CalMatters analysis.
Corporate political spending is increasing because business wants a specific outcome when the government thinks about regulation, Ross added. "That's when they're going to commit."
"It's so worth it for them to spend the money up front," said Jeremy Mack, executive director of the Phoenix Project, which tracks money in Bay Area politics. It's cheaper, he said, "to buy off politicians instead of confronting them if they get someone in there who opposes their interests."
Money also serves as a signal to elected officials and advocates that companies are well capitalized and willing to spend to win. Even those lawmakers who may not accept money from a company are still aware of the large sums being invested, especially if it's for an opponent.
"It has a chilling effect on all the other lawmakers who may or may not be getting money spent against them, but they see this war chest and they're worried about what it might mean if it's spent against them," TechEquity's Bracey said. "They would be worried about what this would mean for them in a future election."
However, companies may think of the money they spend now as an investment to avoid nationwide campaigns later. Since January, wealthy investors from Silicon Valley have already invested millions of dollars in the fight against the proposed wealth tax initiative.
"Of course, it's not like the money wins every time," McMorris said. "But that doesn't change the fact that it gives an advantage, an extreme advantage, to the rich and powerful special interests, and even when they lose, they still buy influence to some extent."
This article was originally published on CalMatters and is republished under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.