The heavy spending by the US Chamber of Commerce in the recent election has prompted at least two local affiliates to crank up their own campaign advocacy while other chamber groups say they are uncomfortable with the overwhelming partisan nature and negative tone of the national group’s advertising.

Peter Forman, president of the South Shore Chamber of Commerce and former Republican officeholder, says he watched with awe and admiration as the national chamber this fall threw its weight around in numerous House and Senate races around the country with great efficacy. He says he has no worries that his members or supporters would balk at backing or opposing candidates or ballot questions that adversely impact them.

“We’re going to step up our advocacy at the local and state level for our issues,” Forman says. “Any business that is that upset by a business organization being involved in the political process and advocating for our best interests probably isn’t going to be a good fit for our organization anyway.”

Bonnie P. Biocchi, president and CEO of MetroWest Chamber of Commerce, said her organization is considering establishing a political action committee to increase its influence in statewide and local elections.

“We certainly are on board with many of the positions taken by the national chamber,” says Biocchi. “I think you will continue to see that in our area. Businesses are under siege.”

Not everyone, though, was comfortable with the chamber’s attacks. In New Hampshire, two local chambers took steps to end their association with the national group and around the country several large companies such as Nike and Microsoft severed their ties with the chamber because of the tone of opposition on environmental issues.

Christopher Cooney, president and CEO of the Metrosouth Chamber of Commerce, says he has voiced his displeasure with national officials about the tenor of the negative advertising and worries about a backlash. He says a better approach would have been defining the chamber and its mission rather than attacking its opponents.

“The tone and the quality of their advertising is not constructive for local chambers and in local races,” says Cooney. “My personal feeling is to take a more positive tack on advertising and saying who the US Chamber is. Some of the ads they have run in New England I don’t think have been constructive and have generated comments from here and there from people I know in the community. They seem to be more negative than positive.”

According to the Federal Election Commission, the US Chamber of Commerce doled out nearly $33 million in this election cycle, culminating in last Tuesday’s elections. No outside group – conservative or liberal – spent more on campaign advertising than the chamber and only the Democrat and Republic congressional campaign committees and the Democratic Senate campaign committee spent more to help elect members of Congress.

With the recent Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case that allows, in effect, unlimited outside expenditures and anonymity for donors, Massachusetts updated its regulations to conform with that ruling. The new regulations from the state’s Office of Campaign and Political Finance allow organizations such as a chamber of commerce to make independent expenditures on behalf of campaigns. The regulations bar unlimited contributions to candidates or campaigns and coordination of activities with candidates.

 In Massachusetts, the US Chamber spent just $160,000, all of it to try to defeat eventual 10th Congressional winner William Keating. The group had success earlier this year when it spent more than $1 million in the special Senate election won by Scott Brown.

J.P. Fielder, a spokesman for the US Chamber, said the organization’s president, Tom Donohue, predicted in January that this year would be the group’s most aggressive voter education and issue effort. “We want to show distinct differences in the policies of  candidates,” he said.

While the national organization says it spends money in districts that feature pro-business candidates of any political stripe, an analysis by The New York Times just before the election found 93 percent of the chamber’s spending went to support Republicans or oppose their Democratic challengers. Just 7 percent was used to bolster Democrats.

Of the 13 Senate races the chamber participated in with advertising, their chosen candidates prevailed in nine of them, including five seats that were in Democrat hands before the election. But the US chamber spent the most money in two of the four seats where they picked a losing horse — $4.9 million to defeat Sen. Barbara Boxer in California and $2.8 million to oust incumbent Sen. Michael Bennett in Colorado. In the 40 House races in which the chamber participated, 65 percent of the candidates they backed won.

The national chamber spent $2.6 million to help elect Republican congressional candidate Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. The majority of the money – $1.7 million – went for negative advertising pummeling her Democratic opponent, US Rep. Paul Hodes.

Forman says party labels are less important than stances on taxes and other issues affecting business, but says support for Republican positions in general is a natural fit for chambers of commerce.

“They do support Democrats and my guess is they probably have a better track record than union PACs have of supporting Republican candidates,” he says. “We make no effort to kind of distinguish it, our local chamber and the national chamber. I would make no effort to try to apologize for the political positions or actions of the US Chamber.”

Forman said he disbanded the South Shore Chamber’s political action committee  several years ago because the $500 donation limit was too constricting to be effective. He now plans to start raising and spending money like the national chamber, although on a much smaller scale. Forman says the South Shore Chamber should get involved in local politics because businesses, unlike individuals, cannot vote but can have an impact on issues that affect businesses.

Other local chambers plan to stay out of politics. Cooney – whose group is one of only six in Massachusetts accredited by the national chamber, its highest level of membership – says Metrosouth is unlikely to step up its advocacy. Gail Sherman, president of the Chicopee Chamber of Commerce, another accredited local chamber, also says her organization will not venture into political races.

“We often align ourselves with their (the national chamber’s) side but we do not take a stand on any individual candidates,” says Sherman. “Issues we will take a side on, candidates we will not.”

Jim Klocke, executive vice president of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, noted his group has no affiliation with the national chamber at all. “We share three words: chamber of commerce,” he says.

Klocke insists he paid little attention to the ads from the national chamber and after a while he said he simply tuned out the cacophony of all the political ads because they ran together. But he says nothing the national or other local chambers do will move his group to become more involved with the electioneering process.

“We’re going to keep doing things the way we’ve done them. We don’t get involved in campaigns and candidate’s races,” says Klocke. “The advertising and the political advocacy that is done by national groups, frankly that is a different ballgame than what happens here. Massachusetts politics is just a different landscape.”