Anthropic poured millions into Washington lobbying while arguing that government rules are needed to keep artificial intelligence safe. Public records show this strategy looks a lot like the playbook used by Sam Bankman-Fried. He was the cryptocurrency entrepreneur who later faced criminal charges. Both leaders pushed for strict regulations while their companies grew. Critics say this is not about safety. They say it is about locking out competitors.
Bankman-Fried lobbied for crypto rules led by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. He said this would protect customers and bring clarity. He supported legislation that critics said favored big exchanges like his own FTX. Prosecutors later alleged he flooded the system with illegal contributions. This was done to increase FTX influence in Washington. Bankman-Fried later admitted his public stance on regulation was just PR. He said this in a direct message after his company collapsed.
Anthropic is doing something similar with AI today. CEO Dario Amodei warns that powerful models pose national security risks. He called for mandatory testing and auditing of advanced systems. He told the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2023 that AI poses grave threats. He wants a regime that can block unsafe models. This sounds like public safety concern. But the money trail tells a different story.
Anthropic spent close to seven million dollars on lobbying from 2025 through mid 2026. Federal disclosures confirm these payments. The company also backed groups including Public First Action, which supports pro-regulation talking points. David Sacks, a former Trump administration AI advisor, called this out. He said Anthropic runs a regulatory capture strategy based on fear. He noted this frenzy damages the startup ecosystem.
The comparison to Bankman-Fried is striking. Brian Chau, an AI investigator, pointed out the parallel. He noted that Bankman-Fried aggressively lobbied to ban competitors. He said the apple does not fall far from the tree. Anthropic denies it wants to harm smaller companies. Amodei wrote that startups are among their most important customers. He pointed to California’s SB 53 bill as an example. This bill exempts companies with revenue below five hundred million dollars.
However, lower-income firms still face transparency rules under that bill. This means small labs must still reveal their data. Critics argue this creates a barrier to entry. It favors big players who can afford compliance costs. Anthropic engages with the Trump administration on these issues. They signed voluntary safety standards at the White House in September. The goal is to keep the US dominant in tech. But the method raises questions about fair competition.
The pattern is clear in the public record. Big companies spend heavily to shape rules. They frame these rules as necessary for safety. Smaller competitors often struggle with the new requirements. Bankman-Fried admitted his safety talk was for show. Anthropic insists its safety concerns are genuine. The reader must decide which motive drives the spending. The money is real and the lobbying is extensive. The impact on small innovators is already visible.