SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:var(--button-bg-color);padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
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.
"Our polling finds that voters want the government to do more to help them," said Data for Progress' leader, warning that "their view of DOGE and the administration could quickly sour."
Survey results released Thursday show that majorities of U.S. voters think billionaire Elon Musk will use his position in the Trump administration for self-enrichment and fear that the presidential advisory commission he is chairing will target Social Security, food assistance, healthcare programs, and more.
Data for Progress and the Progressive Change Institute conducted a series of surveys about Musk—the world's richest person—and the new Department of Government Efficiency( DOGE) in the lead-up to and shortly after Republican President Donald Trump's return to the White House on December 14-15, January 10-11, and January 24-27.
Watchdogs and some lawmakers have sounded the alarm about Musk—whose business affiliations include social media platform X, space exploration company SpaceX, and electric vehicle makerTesla—potentially using his post at DOGE to benefit himself, and the new polling suggests voters share those concerns.
Pollsters found that 51% of voters across the political spectrum agreed that Musk "isn't interested in efficiency, he's only interested in enriching himself," and he will be able to use DOGE to direct resources—including more federal contracts—toward his companies and weaponize the government to undermine competitors.
There were clear divisions among party lines: 74% of Democrats expect self-enrichment from Musk, while just 29% of Republicans have such concerns. Independents and third-party voters were split at 49%. Among all respondents, 14% said they "don't know," and 35% believe that "Musk has shown he has experience saving taxpayers money and helping the government improve."
Trump announced that the billionaire would lead DOGE—which is focused on gutting federal regulations and slashing spending—shortly after his November victory, which was aided by over a quarter-billion dollars from Musk. They initially floated cutting $2 trillion but Musk has since tempered expectations.
The pollsters found that 87% of U.S. voters are somewhat or very concerned about DOGE and the Trump administration targeting Social Security for cuts. Similarly, 84% fear cuts to veterans' healthcare, and 83% worry about cuts to the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid, or Medicare.
The polling shows that 79% are worried about reducing food inspections as well as research for cancer, chronic illness, and infectious diseases. Additionally, 78% fear cuts to food assistance for low-income families, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
Majorities of voters are concerned about downsizing national defense as well as cutting the federal workforce and funding for national parks, according to the surveys. They are also worried about reducing: federal disaster response and weather monitoring, environmental and toxic waste cleanup, road maintenance, mail delivery, and student loan aid.
The surveyers also questioned voters about messaging on the Musk-led commission. As Data for Progress detailed in a Thursday blog post:
When a case for DOGE is tested against two alternative messages against DOGE, saying DOGE will "steal from you by cutting Social Security, Medicare, and veterans healthcare to give tax breaks to giant corporations and billionaires like Musk" performs better with Independent voters, whose views on DOGE shifted 24 points more unfavorably on net, compared with simply saying DOGE will cut those programs or simply saying DOGE will benefit billionaires...
Additionally, while saying DOGE will cut programs to "give tax breaks to giant corporations and billionaires like Musk" effectively decreases DOGE's favorability, a message that combines "steal from you" and "give tax breaks" has an even greater negative impact on voters' opinion on DOGE, particularly among Independents whose views on DOGE shifted 14 points more unfavorably on net with the combined message.
Another round of tax cuts for the wealthy, similar to the law Trump signed in 2017, is a top legislative priority for Republicans, who now control both chambers of Congress in addition to the White House.
The pollsters also found that 56% of all voters—including 67% of Democrats, 55% of Independents, and 45% of Republicans—believe "the government should do more to solve problems and help Americans." Another 19% believe the government is doing "the right amount," while 22% think it is doing "too much" and 7% aren't sure.
Data for Progress executive director Danielle Deiseroth noted in a Thursday statement that the survey results were published amid mass chaos over a now-rescinded Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memo about Trump's federal funding freeze, which led to lawsuits and the Tuesday shutdown of Medicaid payment portals nationwide.
"As Trump's chaotic OMB memo showed, his administration is using 'government efficiency' as a way to slash the healthcare and benefits that Americans rely on each day from the federal government," she said. "Our polling finds that voters want the government to do more to help them, and as they learn more about these disruptions led by Trump and Elon Musk, their view of DOGE and the administration could quickly sour."
"No Corporate Cabinet calls out the Trump administration for empowering those who prey on Americans on behalf of billionaires and corporations," explained one advocate.
A coalition of watchdog groups on Monday launched a "No Corporate Cabinet" website raising the alarm about "persons of interest" who were selected to serve in Republican U.S. President Donald Trump's second administration.
"No American executive branch has ever been entirely free of corrupting influence—but this administration appears to be nearly free of anything or anyone that isn't corporate," said Jeff Hauser, executive director and founder of Revolving Door Project, in a statement. "No Corporate Cabinet will be a vehicle by which we can monitor the people who appear to be in government for the purpose of gaining greater wealth and power for themselves and their friends and family."
The website, NoCorporateCabinet.org, came just a week after Inauguration Day. Along with Hauser's group, it is backed by Demand Progress Education Fund, Justice Democrats, Progressive Change Institute, and RootsAction.
"No Corporate Cabinet will be a vehicle by which we can monitor the people who appear to be in government for the purpose of gaining greater wealth and power for themselves and their friends and family."
So far, it features six individuals: Paul Atkins, a Wall Street ally nominated to be Securities and Exchange Commission chair; Scott Bessent, a hedge fund founder and fossil fuel investor nominated to be treasury secretary; Frank Bisignano, a bank executive nominated to be Social Security Administration commissioner; Linda McMahon: a billionaire and former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO nominated to be education secretary; David Sacks: a Big Tech venture capitalist named as Trump's artificial intelligence and crypto czar; and Chris Wright, a fracking executive nominated to be energy secretary.
"Whether inside or outside of government, Paul Atkins... has spent his whole career undermining the federal government's regulation of Wall Street," states the website, highlighting his opposition to the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, climate disclosure policies, and investors considering environmental, social, and governance factors. The site adds that he also "frequently disapproved of enforcement actions" and "has long disparaged progressive efforts to shape corporate behavior while praising conservative efforts to dominate politics."
Bessent—whom the Senate is set to vote on Monday evening—is "a former investor for billionaire George Soros" who "made a name for himself by bringing down the British economy in the 'Black Wednesday' scandal of the 1990s," the site says, pointing to investments in oil and gas as well as companies including Meta, Monsanto, and Palantir.
Bisignano "has spent his professional career working for the big banks, prioritizing the corporate profits of the financial industry over the concerns of everyday Americans, for example supporting organizations that support raising the retirement age," the website details. "Bisignano has no experience in government and should have no role in the Trump administration, he would simply represent yet another corporate voice who has been rewarded for their financial support of Donald Trump."
Although Trump has teased dismantling the U.S. Department of Education entirely, in the meantime, he has tapped scandal-plagued McMahon to lead it—despite allegations that she has, as End Rape on Campus CEO Kenyora Parham recently put it, a "documented history of enabling sexual abuse of children and sweeping sexual violence under the rug."
McMahon also "denied health oversight and coverage for her workers, helped bust unions, seems to have dodged federal lawsuits over widespread steroid abuse, ignored her workers' deaths," and " became something of a Republican megadonor," the new website notes. During Trump's first presidency, she led the Small Business Administration.
Sacks "reportedly did not want to step down from his VC firm, Craft Ventures," so he is serving in "a part-time, nonformal role" and "could serve up to 130 days a year without divesting or publicly disclosing his assets," the site explains. "Sacks' long and documented history as a vocal and inflammatory conservative voice does not bode well for the development of egalitarian AI models that prioritize public benefit over innovation."
The full Senate hasn't yet voted on Wright, but his confirmation hearing earlier this month was disrupted by the arrest of climate activists with the youth-led Sunrise Movement—whose executive director, Aru Shiney-Ajay, said: "The climate crisis is here. Oil and gas CEOs like Chris Wright have blood on their hands, and they have no place in our government."
Wright "was the CEO and co-founder of Liberty Energy, an oilfield service and fracking company, and sat on the board of small modular nuclear reactor start-up Oklo," which was "initially denied approval for a nuclear reactor in Idaho after providing inadequate information regarding safety measures," the new site says. "Wright regularly makes public statements downplaying the effects of climate change, carbon pollution, and the environmental impacts of fracking."
Sean Vitka, policy director at Demand Progress Education Fund, said Monday that "Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, dirty energy, and other corporate interests are only interested in maximizing profits."
"Executives, lobbyists, and donors are reshaping government services and regulatory oversight to enrich corporate America at the expense of everyday Americans," he added. "No Corporate Cabinet calls out the Trump administration for empowering those who prey on Americans on behalf of billionaires and corporations."
The belief that Supreme Court justices "should not be held accountable or even disclose lavish gifts from wealthy benefactors is an affront to the nation they were chosen to serve," said one lawmaker.
As the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee prepared to mark up legislation aimed at reining in the Supreme Court, on which the nation's nine top justices are not required to abide by a code of ethics, a new survey released Wednesday suggested that supporting such a proposal would help rather than harm a political candidate.
In a poll commissioned by court reform group Demand Justice, YouGov found that 59% of Americans are less likely to support a congressional candidate who opposes ethics reform at the Supreme Court.
More than three months after ProPublica first reported on previously undisclosed gifts right-wing Justice Clarence Thomas received from GOP megadonor Harlan Crow—a revelation that was followed by other news of alleged ethical breaches by Justices Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, and John Roberts—the new poll found that a candidate who opposes requiring the Supreme Court to follow a binding code of ethics would have the support of just 23% of respondents.
The poll was released as Senate Republicans signaled that they won't support the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency (SCERT) Act, which was introduced by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told The New York Times this week that the Supreme Court is "accustomed to dealing with these issues on their own."
Despite Republican opposition, said Demand Justice, Democrats' case will only be bolstered by proceeding with the bill markup and forcing the GOP to vote on the SCERT Act.
"Defending blatant corruption is always a losing proposition in politics, and Republicans have backed themselves into a corner by opposing ethics reform in order to give cover to the likes of Clarence Thomas," said Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice. "Senate Democrats should feel confident in bringing this bill to the floor of the full Senate even if it may lack the votes. Passing the bill would obviously be ideal, but short of that, exposing the Republicans on this issue is a surefire political winner for Democrats."
In addition to requiring the justices to follow a binding code of conduct—as other federal judges do—the SCERT Act would create a system for investigating alleged ethics violations; improve disclosure and transparency rules when a justice has connection to a party that has business before the court, including those that file amicus briefs; and require justices to publicly explain their decisions regarding recusal from certain cases.
Despite several of the court's right-wing justices having accepted financial gifts from and completed real estate transactions with conservative groups and operatives with business before the Supreme Court, they have not recused themselves from the cases in question.
The court's recent overturning of "longstanding decisions" including Roe v. Wade is "especially alarming in light of the reported conflicts of interest and failures to disclose financial transactions as required by law," said Marc Egan, director of government relations for the National Education Association, in a letter to the judiciary committee regarding the markup.
"This behavior is unethical, unacceptable, and undermines the promise engraved above the entrance to the Supreme Court: Equal justice under law," wrote Egan. "As the Code of Conduct for United States judges, which applies to lower federal court judges, states, 'A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety.'"
Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, joined Whitehouse last week in announcing the bill markup planned for Thursday, rejecting Republican claims that court reform is a "radical or partisan notion."
"Whether you agree or disagree with the most recent historic decisions by the Supreme Court, we hope we can all agree on one thing—these nine justices have extraordinary powers under our constitution," said Durbin and Whitehouse. "The belief that they should not be held accountable or even disclose lavish gifts from wealthy benefactors is an affront to the nation they were chosen to serve."
"Since the court won't act," they added, "Congress will."
Demand Justice's poll was released as a separate survey by Data for Progress found that 62% of Americans believe the court is increasingly corrupted and has a legitimacy crisis, including large majorities or Democrats and Independents and more than 40% of Republicans.
"Senate Democrats are right to advance Supreme Court ethics legislation because Americans overwhelmingly view this court as corrupt and facing a legitimacy crisis," said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Institute, which joined Data for Progress in conducting the poll. "Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito took money from billionaires and then did their bidding—trampling on the freedoms of women, workers, and all Americans. We hope Republican leaders join Democrats in supporting Supreme Court ethics."