

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Billionaires are on track to break their $1 billion midterm spending record," said Americans for Tax Fairness.
Just 50 billionaire families in the United States have already dumped more than $430 million into the 2026 midterms, with the vast majority of the money flowing to Republican candidates and right-wing organizations such as MAGA Inc.—a super PAC aligned with President Donald Trump.
The progressive advocacy group Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) released an analysis on Wednesday examining the most recent Federal Election Commission data, which underscores increasingly aggressive billionaire efforts to use their immense wealth to secure their favored political outcomes. In the 2024 federal elections, billionaires accounted for nearly 20% of all donations.
Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, tops the list of 2026 campaign spenders so far, donating roughly $71 million—including $10 million in support of a pro-Trump candidate running to succeed Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
Behind Musk is businessman Jeff Yass, a relatively low-profile billionaire who has spent millions in recent years promoting school privatization. Yass has so far spent $55 million in the 2026 midterm cycle, $16 million of which went to MAGA Inc.—the largest recipient of the billionaire's donations.
Combined, the 50 top-spending billionaire families—which ATF describes as "modern-day royalty"—have poured $433 million into the 2026 midterms to date.
"Billionaires are on track to break their $1 billion midterm spending record," ATF noted on social media, referring to the 2022 midterms. "The spending is projected to grow exponentially as November approaches."

ATF published its analysis days ahead of the latest round of nationwide "No Kings" protests against the Trump administration this coming Saturday, March 28.
“The American people reject kings, political or financial,” David Kass, executive director of ATF, said in a statement on Wednesday. “Whether it’s an out-of-control chief executive in the White House or a billionaire wielding his huge fortune to influence elections, anti-democratic behavior is anathema to the American public."
"As we approach the 250th anniversary of our independence from the British monarchy," Kass added, "it’s more important than ever that we reform our campaign-finance and tax laws so that no billionaire can purchase a crown.”
ATF found that nearly 80% of top billionaire families' 2026 midterm spending—$344.3 million of the $433 million total—has gone to Republicans and GOP organizations, with the pro-Trump MAGA Inc. super PAC receiving $89 million, far more than any other group.
Four of the top five recipients of midterm cash from the nation's richest billionaire are pro-Republican PACs.
"Republicans and conservatives receive the lion’s share of billionaire financial support because it is the nation’s right-wing that works to ensure the wealthiest families get to keep and expand their fortunes, such as through the GOP tax-and-spending law enacted last year," ATF noted.
Trump is considering putting US troops on the ground in Iran. Only 12% of Americans want that to happen, according to a new Associated Press-NORC poll.
Nearly six in ten Americans say President Donald Trump's war in Iran has gone too far, according to a poll out Wednesday from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
The war launched late last month by the US and Israel has led to the deaths of more than 1,400 Iranian civilians, according to the Human Rights Activist News Agency (HRANA), and the displacement of more than 3 million. It has spiraled out across the region while creating a global economic crisis that has caused gas prices to spike to nearly $4 per gallon in the US.
Now, 59% of American adults say it's "gone too far," compared to just 26% who say it's "been about right" and 13% who say it's "not gone far enough," according to the survey of 1,150 people.
Those opposed to continuing the president's war of choice include 90% of Democrats and 63% of independents. Most Republicans, 52%, say the amount of force used by Trump has been “about right.” Just 20% want him to go further, while 26% say he’s gone too far.
In recent days, as Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz has wreaked havoc on global oil prices, Trump has sent thousands more servicemembers to the region and reportedly mulled deploying American ground troops in hopes of reopening the crucial waterway.
Experts have warned that a ground deployment could turn the war into an even greater quagmire. Already, 13 US soldiers have been killed since February 28.
An even larger share of Americans, 62%, said they oppose the idea of deploying US troops on the ground in Iran, while just 12% say they support it and 26% say they have no opinion.
While a minority says it is very important for the US to stop Iran from threatening Israel or to replace its government with one more favorable to the US, Americans are prioritizing issues at home.
Ninety-three percent said it was very or somewhat important for the US to keep oil and gas prices low, which has so far not happened—in less than a month, they have spiked by about a dollar and have not shown signs of coming down, even as Trump has deployed emergency fuel reserves and lifted sanctions on some Iranian oil to juice supply.
A majority of Americans, 65%, also said they felt that preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon—one of Trump's stated objectives for the war—was a very important foreign policy goal.
However, as journalist and commentator Adam Johnson pointed out in a piece for The Real News on Tuesday, the US public is "grossly misinformed" about the subject—25% wrongly believe Iran already possesses a nuke while 45% believe they are working towards developing one, which has been refuted by US intelligence assessments and reporting based on the testimony of US officials.
The unpopularity of the war with Iran is in line with previous polls showing that the majority of Americans believe the war benefits Israel more than the US and want the war to end quickly.
With Trump having returned to office on the explicit pledge to avoid war with Iran and the cost of living already at the center of the president's near-historic unpopularity, Republicans' outlook for this year's midterm elections looks as grim as ever.
Polling aggregators predict Democrats will easily flip the House, and the Senate is now a toss-up, though Republicans still hold a slight edge.
According to polls, Republicans’ midterm chances truly began to tank in January amid outrage over federal immigration agents' killings of two US citizens in Minneapolis. Though surveys haven't shown GOP numbers getting markedly worse since the war began, recent opinion polling suggests it is not a non-factor.
A poll last week from the Institute of Middle East Understanding found that 43% of voters said they're less likely to support Republicans in the midterms as a result of the war, compared to 31% who said they're more likely.
A former Trump voter said that the cost of healthcare was driving her to support any party "that can help me afford to stay healthy."
While President Donald Trump's poll numbers have been sinking to second-term lows ever since his unconstitutional war on Iran sent gas prices soaring, pain at the pump isn't the only concern Americans face when it comes to affordability.
The New York Times reported on Tuesday that voters' anxiety on the cost of healthcare is once again on the rise, with insurance premiums spiking dramatically for tens of millions of Americans after Trump and his Republican congressional allies failed to extend enhanced subsidies for plans purchased through exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Shawn Spencer, a 48-year-old Virginia resident, told the Times that while she voted for Trump in the 2024 presidential election, she'd be open to supporting any party "that can help me afford to stay healthy."
"Healthcare costs are out of control," emphasized Spencer. "I don’t have insurance, so I’m paying a boatload when I need care."
In addition to the increases to ACA premiums spurred by the lapsed subsidies, Republicans last year also slashed $1 trillion over the next decade from Medicaid as part of their One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
The Times noted that those cuts aren't expected to kick in until after the 2026 midterm elections, but they have already resulted in healthcare layoffs and hospital closures throughout the country, as some facilities are projecting they will not be able to stay afloat with reduced Medicaid reimbursements.
The Times pointed specifically Iowa's 3rd Congressional District, where "a healthcare company has closed clinics and laid off 67 staff members at a hospital in Des Moines, blaming the federal cuts for a projected $1.5 billion in annual revenue reductions."
Sarah Trone Garriott, a Lutheran minister and former hospital chaplain who is running in the district for the US House of Representatives against incumbent Rep. Zach Nunn (R-Iowa), has made the healthcare cuts central to her campaign message, mocking her rival for saying it's a "myth" that local hospital cuts are due to the GOP budget law.
Dr. Peter Reiter, who worked for decades at one of the shuttered clinics, was quoted in the Times blaming Nunn for its closure.
“Zach Nunn owns this,” Reiter said. “He needs to pay the price of accountability."
The Times report was flagged on Tuesday by Unrig Our Economy campaign director Leor Tal, who said it was yet more evidence that the GOP is out of touch with the needs of working-class Americans who are struggling to afford basic necessities.
"If Republicans spent half as much time focusing on lowering costs as they did giving handouts to billionaires, working Americans wouldn’t be so concerned about affording care," said Tal. "Congressional Republicans clearly aren’t prioritizing making life more affordable for their constituents. If they did, they wouldn’t have repeatedly voted to send their healthcare costs soaring and put millions at risk of losing insurance altogether."