Sam Altman’s “something’s clearly not working” remark was an opinion about how political spending might affect perceptions of AI—not evidence that the spending has changed those perceptions. In a Politico interview, the OpenAI CEO said people value AI tools but remain concerned about economic effects and concentrated power, and argued that political donations would not resolve those concerns.
What Altman meant by “not working”
In the first episode of Politico’s Decoded podcast, interviewer Brendan Bordelon asked how political spending by AI companies and executives had affected politicians’ and the public’s perception of AI. Altman answered: “Well, something’s clearly not working. I don’t think the perception of AI is where we’d like it to be.” Listen to the interview.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
He was describing a mismatch: people can find AI useful while still worrying about its wider effects. Altman said AI tools can make life easier and give users time back, but he also pointed to anxiety about economic consequences and fear of concentrated power. His point was that political spending would not make people feel better about AI if those concerns remained unaddressed.
Altman put the distinction plainly: “I don’t think spending money on politics is what’s going to make people feel better about it.” He also called parts of the industry tone-deaf and urged companies to focus on what people are actually concerned about. This is his assessment, not a measured finding that political money has failed to move opinion.
#1 Best Overall
Altman’s position on money in politics
Altman said he would prefer to see less money in politics overall, but did not think the AI industry could unilaterally “disarm” while others continued to spend. He also objected to a selective approach in which some people could give and others could not. He said he would support a way to reduce political spending if it applied across the board.
He said he had supported individual candidates in the past but was not donating to candidates at the time of the interview. He explained that AI was central to his work and that OpenAI did business with government.
The interview also raised a reported $25 million gift by OpenAI president Greg Brockman to Leading the Future and a reported decision not to make an additional $25 million contribution. Altman said he had not seen the report and did not want to respond to that specific matter; the interviewer’s account should not be treated as confirmation from Altman.
PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Outdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchWhat reported political-spending figures show
AI-linked political groups have backed candidates while advocating different approaches to AI regulation. The figures below come from separate reports with different definitions and dates; they are not one running total.
Rank #3
| Reported figure | What it measures | Qualification |
|---|---|---|
| More than $38 million | Spending by four AI-linked super PACs to influence races | Los Angeles Times report dated June 21, 2026; spending through June 15, 2026. The report attributed $14.1 million to Think Big, $8 million to American Mission, $11 million to Jobs and Democracy, and $5.2 million to Defending Our Values. Los Angeles Times |
| More than $185 million | Collective contributions by OpenAI and Anthropic to contests | Reported by The Washington Post on March 12, 2026. This is a different measure and reporting date from the four-super-PAC spending figure; the amounts should not be added. The Washington Post |
| More than $1 billion | Dark money tracked across U.S. politics | OpenSecrets figure for 2024, quoted by the Los Angeles Times. It is broad political-finance context, not AI-industry spending; the report said it was $350 million higher than in the previous presidential election. Los Angeles Times |
The Washington Post also described AI-backed candidates as having early primary success in Texas and North Carolina in its March 2026 account. That was an early-cycle snapshot, not a final election result.
What the public-attitude figures do—and do not—tell us
Separate surveys and indicators provide context for concerns surrounding AI, but none of the figures below measures whether political spending caused people’s views to change.
- National attitudes: Pew Research Center found in 2025 that 50 percent of Americans were more concerned than excited about increased AI use, as reported by The Washington Post. This describes sentiment, not its cause. The Washington Post
- Wisconsin data-center concerns: Marquette University reported in 2026 that 70 percent of registered Wisconsin voters said data-center costs outweighed benefits. This is a state-specific view about data centers and their costs, not a national measure of attitudes toward political spending or AI overall. The Washington Post
- Electricity prices: The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported a 28 percent increase in electricity prices since the end of 2021, a figure cited by The Washington Post in its 2026 discussion of data-center politics. It does not measure campaign spending or public opinion. The Washington Post
Does the evidence prove that political spending is changing AI perceptions?
No. The interview records Altman’s view; spending reports document political activity; and surveys capture attitudes at particular times. Taken together, they show that AI is politically contested and that concerns about economic effects, concentrated power, and data-center costs are part of the debate. They do not isolate whether political spending improved, worsened, or had no effect on public perceptions.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsSo “clearly not working” is best read as Altman’s judgment that political money is not the way to reassure people—not as a demonstrated causal finding about what voters think or why.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
