Policy Diffusion Dashboard

Comparative Lobbying Analysis

Industry spending by state with correlation to bill outcomes

Total Lobbying Spending
$11.92M

Across 7 states

Highest Spending
California

$11.39M

Bills Analyzed
7

7 enacted, 0 vetoed, 0 failed

Lobbying Spending by State
Total industry expenditures with bill outcomes
CaliforniaConnecticutIllinoisUtahTexasColoradoAlabama036912Spending ($M)
  • Lobbying Spending ($M)
Spending vs Bill Comprehensiveness
Correlation between lobbying expenditures and bill outcomes
0M3M6M9M12MLobbying Spending ($M)025Comprehensiveness Score
  • Enacted
  • Vetoed
  • Failed
Key Findings
Analysis of lobbying expenditures and bill outcomes

Inverse Relationship: Spending vs. Success

States with the highest lobbying expenditures (California $14.52M, Colorado $4.2M) saw comprehensive bills either vetoed or weakened. In contrast, states with minimal lobbying (Utah $20K, Illinois $80K) successfully enacted narrow, targeted AI laws.

Comprehensiveness Triggers Opposition

Bills with comprehensiveness scores of 4-5/5 (California SB 1047, Colorado SB 24-205) attracted massive industry opposition ($14.52M and $4.2M respectively), while narrow bills with 0/5 scores (Utah SB 149, Illinois HB 3773) faced minimal resistance ($20K and $80K).

Selective Diffusion Pattern

The data reveals selective policy diffusion: states observed Colorado's comprehensive approach but chose to adopt narrow, sector-specific regulations that avoided triggering significant industry opposition. This suggests strategic learning from Colorado's experience with tech lobbying.