Why it Matters

The Center for AI Policy maintains its focused lobbying campaign with $74,165 in Q2 2025 spending. The organization bypasses external firms to run its own advocacy operation. This consistency underscores the group’s commitment to addressing what it sees as existential AI threats through government action.

By the Numbers

  • Internal lobbying: The Center conducts all advocacy in-house with no external firm.
  • Q2 2025 spending: $74,165
  • Total spending since 2024: $531,720 across 8 disclosure filings
  • Lobbying team: Three-person operation led by Brian Daniel Waldrip (16+ years House experience), Katherine R. Forscey (former tech policy advisor to Rep. Anna Eshoo), and Jason Ian Green-Lowe.

Broader Context

Congress is actively wrestling with AI governance through multiple legislative channels. Bipartisan concern about advanced AI risks has generated numerous bills and high-profile hearings. The legislative environment shows urgency around establishing federal oversight frameworks before state-level patchworks emerge.

The Agenda

The Center focuses exclusively on “mitigating catastrophic risks from advanced, general-purpose artificial intelligence.” Their lobbying spans computer industry issues, consumer safety, and science/technology policy. The organization has maintained this singular focus across seven of its eight historical filings.

Competitive Landscape

The Center operates in a crowded AI policy space alongside major tech companies, industry trade groups, and other advocacy organizations. Most industry players focus on innovation-friendly regulation while civil liberties groups emphasize bias and privacy concerns. The Center’s catastrophic risk focus distinguishes it from these broader commercial and civil rights approaches.

Between The Lines

Active legislation aligns with the Center’s mission. The Advanced AI Security Readiness Act directs NSA to develop AI security playbooks. The bipartisan AI Whistleblower Protection Act would protect employees reporting AI vulnerabilities.

Recent hearings reveal sophisticated congressional thinking on AI risks. The House Select Committee examined “Algorithms and Authoritarians” while Homeland Security explored AI cybersecurity threats.

The Bottom Line

The Center maintains steady lobbying investment during active congressional deliberation on AI governance. Their focused approach on catastrophic risks positions them as specialized advocates in broader technology policy debates. The organization’s consistent messaging and experienced team suggest sustained engagement rather than opportunistic advocacy.

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article