SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
dark money
'They've Come to Collect': Report Details Crisis of Billionaires Buying US Elections
"The billions of dollars of donations these oligarchic clans give candidates, parties, and particularly outside spending groups drown out the voices and concerns of ordinary voters," according to the report.
Apr 02, 2025
The ever-growing amount of billionaire cash in elections is poisoning U.S. democracy, according to a report published Wednesday by the advocacy group Americans for Tax Fairness—which found that the top 100 billionaire families spent an eye-popping $2.6 billion on federal contests in 2024.
That's more than twice the roughly $1 billion spent by individual billionaire donors in 2020, according to the group, and constitutes 160 times the amount of billionaire political spending since the 2010 Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. That decision paved the way for the proliferation of super political action committees (PACs), a type of committee that can accept unlimited donations to spend on political activity.
Picking apart that $2.6 billion, there's a clear partisan skew: 70% of that billionaire money went to entities supporting Republican candidates, while 23% went to entities backing Democratic candidates. The other 7% went toward independent candidates—such as presidential contender Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is now a Cabinet secretary—and committees that gave to candidates from both parties who champion specific issues, such as cryptocurrency.
That skew is particularly pronounced when it comes to the competitive Senate races that determined control of the chamber in 2024.
Looking at Senate contests in Arizona, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, the authors of the report found that nearly 80% of the total billionaire cash in these races—which tallied $1.14 billion in outside spending—went to outside groups supporting Republican candidates, compared to 20% used to support Democratic hopefuls.
"The billions of dollars of donations these oligarchic clans give candidates, parties, and particularly outside spending groups drown out the voices and concerns of ordinary voters, endangering democracy and distorting public policy," the report states.
What's more, "this undue influence by the billionaire donor class over our government—always a concern and already present in mostly indirect ways—has found its full, frightening expression in the second Trump administration with the ascendancy of Elon Musk, the world's richest man and the biggest billionaire donor in the 2024 elections," the authors wrote.
Musk's ability to convert his extreme wealth into political influence in the Trump administration contrasts with reports that Musk pays relatively little in taxes. In 2018, for example, Musk paid nothing in federal income taxes even as his wealth soared, largely due to Tesla stock appreciation.
But Musk is just the "most notorious example of billionaires literally buying power," according to the group. ATF highlighted that billionaire Linda McMahon secured a position as President Donald Trump's education secretary after she and her ex-husband gave tens of millions to support Republican candidates, as did billionaire businessman Howard Lutnick, now the commerce secretary.
The report, titled Billionaires Buying Elections: They've Come to Collect, is the latest in ATF's "billionaires buying elections" series, and according to the group it is the most comprehensive because it covers both direct billionaire giving and "traces the indirect routes billionaire cash can take through campaign committees contributing to each other."
In its methodology section, the report gives the example of WinSenate—a super PAC that works to elect Democrats to the Senate—which did not report billionaire contributions, but received all of its funding from the Senate Majority PAC. Because the Senate Majority PAC got 19.9% of its funding from billionaires, the report counted WinSenate's share of billionaire spending at 19.9%.
According to the report, other big-name Republican megadonors in the 2024 cycle included shipping supply magnates Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein and Israeli-American billionaire Miriam Adelson.
According to the authors of the report, billionaires need to be taxed more.
"Tax policy—which has the most direct impact on billionaire wealth—is perhaps the most obviously affected by the money-for-power billionaire bargain," according to the group, which cites the current Republican push to extend parts of Trump's 2017 tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthy as part of a general trend in tax policy over the past four decades to decrease taxes on the wealthiest people and most profitable businesses.
"The self-reinforcing combination of booming billionaire fortunes and weakening campaign finance laws continues to threaten our democratic form of government," according to the report. "As the outcome of the last presidential campaign amply demonstrates, until billionaires pay their fair share of taxes and we put effective curbs on their political spending, this threat will only grow."
The report calls for solutions like bolstering the estate tax and implementing a wealth tax, such as the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, a bill that was reintroduced by multiple Democratic senators in 2024. The newer version of the legislation would place a 2% annual tax on the net worth of households and trusts between $50 million and $1 billion, and impose an 1% annual surtax—so 3% tax overall—on the net worth of families and trusts that is above $1 billion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'This Guy Is Toxic': Susan Crawford Defeats World's Richest Man Elon Musk in Wisconsin
"As a result of your strong grassroots organizing, you have defeated the wealthiest person on earth," said Sen. Bernie Sanders to the state's voters after the Supreme Court race was called. "You have set an example for the rest of the country."
Apr 01, 2025
The battle over a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court was settled decisively on Tuesday night as the Democratic favorite Susan Crawford dispatched with far-right favorite Brad Schimel, a candidate backed by tens of millions of dollars in outside money and corporate interests, including an estimated $20 million or more from President Donald Trump sycophant and world's wealthiest individual Elon Musk.
As of this writing, Crawford, a Dane County Judge, was enjoying "an unexpectedly easy" win with 55.5% of the vote compared to the 44.5% received by Schimel, the state's former Republican attorney general. Numerous decision desks called the race in her favor shortly after polls closed, and the returns were clear.
"Thank you," Crawford said in a victory speech from the city of Madison shortly after 9:30 pm local time. "Alright, Wisconsin—we did it!"
Crawford said she had just received a concession phone call from Schimel—describing him as "gracious" in defeat—as she thanked the people of Wisconsin for delivering a hard-fought victory in what has been documented as the "most expensive judicial race ever" in U.S. history.
"Tonight, the grassroots have risen up to defeat Musk and the MAGA authoritarianism he's funding."
"Thank you for trusting me to serve you on the Wisconsin Supreme Court," she told the audience of supporters and national television cameras. "I'm so grateful to have earned the trust and support of voters across this great state." She explained that she got into this race—like how she had spent her life—"to do what's right, to protect the rights and fundamental freedoms of all Wisconites."
Crediting her career success to the values learned in the small Wisconsin town of Chippewa Falls—"where people watched out for each other" and people respected the ability to "tell right from wrong"—Crawford said that growing up she never imagined she would ultimately "be taking on the richest man in the world" in a political fight that has gained national attention and was widely seen as a political referendum on the first two months of the Trump administration's policies.
The battle, she said, was "over justice in Wisconsin—and we won!"
Musk has become a key factor in the race over recent weeks by spending millions of his own money backing Schimel. One gimmick he used over the recent weekend was handing out $1 million checks to people, according to critics, to purchase their support and vote.
Progressive lawmakers were among those chiming in with applause Tuesday night.
"Elon Musk spent MILLIONS to defeat Susan Crawford in Wisconsin—and it was an epic fail," declared Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) after announcing her victory. "Voters saw through his schemes, and our country is better off for it. Thank you, Wisconsinites."
Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Our Revolution, was among those celebrating Crawford's win as an apparent rebuke to Musk and President Trump.
"Despite pouring over $20 million into this race—including handing out million-dollar checks to voters—the world's wealthiest man has failed to secure a conservative majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court," said Geevarghese. "Crawford's victory is a decisive win for protecting abortion access and workers' rights in Wisconsin. It also serves as a crucial safeguard against Donald Trump's ongoing attempts to subvert American democracy and erode judicial independence."
While the resounding defeat of Schimel by voters will be "viewed as a critical referendum on Trump and Musk’s dangerous, lawless agenda," he added, the amount of money spent during the race "also stands as a stark warning about the deep corruption within our broken campaign finance system. With spending exceeding $100 million, this election has become the most expensive state Supreme Court race in U.S. history, with billionaire donations flooding in on both sides."
"Tonight, the grassroots have risen up to defeat Musk and the MAGA authoritarianism he's funding," Geevarghese said. "But the fight to eliminate dark money from our political system is far from over. Continued inaction poses an urgent, looming threat to our democracy and way of life."
American Bridge, a research and rapid response group with close ties to the Democratic Party, feasted on Schimel's loss by deriding the GOP favorite as the "biggest loser in Wisconsin history."
"Wisconsinites have spoken, and together their votes decided that Wisconsin needs leaders who will protect our freedoms while rejecting the politics of fear and division."
Schimel, said the group's spokesperson Monica Venzke, "clearly can’t take a hint, but hopefully this time it sticks—Wisconsin wants nothing to do with him. Not even his out-of-state billionaire supporter could buy him this one. Imagine spending over $18 million and still losing."
According to Venzke, the defeat of Schimel despite the tens of millions spent by corporate forces "is just a preview of how voters are rejecting Trump's agenda of folding to billionaires. Republicans around the country have a choice: stand up to Trump, or lose."
Lucy Ripp, communications director for Better Wisconsin Together, which represents progressives' concerns in the state, also credited the work of the state's grassroots, which she suggested was a model for people nationwide.
"Wisconsinites have spoken, and together their votes decided that Wisconsin needs leaders who will protect our freedoms while rejecting the politics of fear and division," said Ripp. "Wisconsin voters chose common sense, progress, and freedom over a radical, right-wing partisan agenda that thrives on dividing our communities and leaving working families behind in service of billionaires and special interests."
"By maintaining a strong progressive majority, the Wisconsin Supreme Court will continue as a first line of defense in protecting Wisconsinites' constitutional rights and freedoms," added Ripp, "and a vital check on the Trump and Musk agenda amid the barrage of threats to our rights and livelihoods coming down from the White House."
As of this writing, neither Trump nor Musk had acknowledged Crawford's victory over Schimel on their main social media channels—though each celebrated the approval of a controversial and "regressive" voter I.D. law in the state. To some critics, their twin silence on the Supreme Court race felt like quite a loud statement.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'He Wants It All': Musk-Linked Group Pours Money Into Wisconsin Supreme Court Race
"Musk's attempt to buy Wisconsin's Supreme Court is a red alert that his attack on democracy isn't limited to gutting the federal government," said Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler.
Feb 19, 2025
A nonprofit with links to billionaire and GOP megadonor Elon Musk is spending over a million dollars in the race for Wisconsin Supreme Court, a high stakes contest that will decide whether liberals or conservatives control the state's highest judicial body.
Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler said in a statement Monday that the news is a sign that Musk and U.S. President Donald Trump know the Wisconsin Supreme Court could be a check "on their lawless coup"—likely in reference to efforts by Musk and the Trump administration more broadly to radically reshape the federal government in recent weeks.
The dark money group, Building America's Future—which was a financial backer for several Republican-alignedsuper political action committees (PACs) during the 2024 cycle—is spending at least $1.5 million in the state, including on ads that are slated to start running later this week, Politicoreported Wednesday. Wisconsin outlets first reported that Building America's Future was involved in the race on Monday.
The ads are expected to be in support of GOP-backed candidate Brad Schimel, who is facing off against liberal-aligned candidate Susan Crawford, and whom Musk has boosted on social media.
In October 2024, multiple outlets reported that Musk gave millions to Building America's Future. According to Reuters, those donations started in 2022, "illustrating quiet financial support for right-wing causes even before the billionaire entrepreneur in July endorsed former President Donald Trump's bid for reelection."
"Musk's attempt to buy Wisconsin's Supreme Court is a red alert that his attack on democracy isn't limited to gutting the federal government," Wikler said. "He wants it all."
In a similar vein, Crawford's campaign spokesperson Derrick Honeyman told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that "it's not surprising that Schimel is groveling for the support of shady special interests—he's already been caught begging on his knees for far-right donors to give him cash, and now Elon seems to be answering his pleas."
At a recent event in Jefferson County, Schimel "all but begged" conservative groups to get involved in the race and lamented the cost of TV ads, according to the Journal Sentinel.
Crawford herself has weighed in, writing on X on Tuesday, "Elon Musk is buying off Brad Schimel."
Dark money groups were expected to wade into this race given the Wisconsin Supreme Court's prominence in national politics in recent years.
In April 2023, elected Milwaukee County Judge Janet Protasiewicz to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, flipping majority control of the body from conservative to liberal for the first time in 15 years. Groups like unions and the political arm of Planned Parenthood donated money in support of Protasiewicz—an outspoken supporter of abortion rights, ballot access, and union protections.
In summer 2024, the state Supreme Court moved to reinstate the ability to return absentee ballots via drop boxes in Wisconsin, a state the U.S. President Donald Trump narrowly won that November.
In January, Musk re-posted a social media comment about Protasiewicz's victory and the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision to reinstate the drop boxes for absentee ballots and wrote: "Very important to vote Republican for the Wisconsin Supreme Court to prevent voting fraud!"
The race is one of the first high-profile special elections to take place after Trump's victory in November, and looking ahead, the ideological makeup of the Wisconsin Supreme Court could influence the maps used in elections for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2026, per Politico.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular