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
reid hoffman
Who Is Funding the Democrats Who Say 'We're Capitalists, Not Socialists'? Probably These Billionaire Capitalists
An investigation found that the anti-socialist group Promise to America has ties to a PAC funded by billionaires such as LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman.
Jul 02, 2026
More than a dozen corporate Democrats last week responded to upstart progressive wins in primaries by pledging their support to a political manifesto called "Promise to America," which emphasizes support for capitalism, law enforcement, and "fiscal discipline."
A Thursday report published by Sludge about the Promise to America found that it "is closely tied to the Welcome Party, a group whose PAC has received more than half of its individual contributions from billionaires."
According to Sludge, the Promise to America appeared in public for the first time last month at Welcome Party's annual WelcomeFest conference, where it was signed by Reps. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and Adam Gray (D-Calif.).
Other prominent Democrats who have signed the pledge include Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Vincente Gonzalez (D-Texas), and Don Davis (D-NC).
Although Sludge uncovered no evidence that Welcome Party is financially supporting the Promise to America, the manifesto's presence at the group's conference was notable given that billionaire donations account for more than 60% of the $10.8 million in donations that it has received over the last five years.
Major donors to the PAC include LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, who has donated a total of $1.8 million, and former 21st Century Fox CEO James Murdoch, who with his wife Kathryn has donated $2.5 million.
Other notable billionaires who have contributed to WelcomePAC include Bain Capital co-founder Joshua Bekenstein, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and several members of the Walton family.
Sludge's investigation also found that "more billionaires may have donated to the Welcome Party’s two 'dark money' nonprofit arms, which do not disclose their donors publicly."
The Promise to America manifesto has drawn heavy criticism from progressives.
In a recent interview with political commentator Santita Jackson, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said that the corporate Democrats' pledge was a reactive document that lacked policy solutions to the problems facing Americans.
"Okay fine, if you’re against [democratic socialists], that’s okay. But what do you believe?" said Ocasio-Cortez. "And that I think is the core of the weaknesses from that wing at this moment. There’s no affirmative vision really coming from most places in the Democratic Party with the exception of democratic socialism."
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) last week also challenged the corporate wing of the party in a speech on the floor of the US House of Representatives in which he defended the vision being laid out by progressive insurgents.
“The progressive movement is winning across the country, from the heart of New York to Michigan to Maine,” Khanna said. “The people are saying no to foreign wars and they’re saying no to genocide in Gaza. They’re saying no to the unfair and lopsided economy that has allowed a few people to hoard extreme wealth and power, and they’re saying yes to Medicare for All.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Mark Cuban Is Wrong': Bernie Sanders Defends Lina Khan as 'Best FTC Chair in Modern History'
"By taking on corporate greed and illegal monopolies, [the FTC chair] is doing an exceptional job preventing large corporations from ripping-off consumers and exploiting workers," said the U.S. Senator from Vermont.
Oct 09, 2024
After billionaire entrepreneur and investor Mark Cuban this week said publicly that he would get rid of Federal Trade Commission chair Lina Khan if he had the chance, Sen. Bernie Sanders pushed back Tuesday by calling her the best person to hold the powerful regulatory post in a long time.
Speaking at a luncheon event hosted by the health policy news outlet KFF in California, Cuban—the outspoken billionaire known for his appearances on the television show Shark Tank and who has endorsed Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris for president—responded to a question about retaining Khan if Harris won November's election by saying, "If it was me, I wouldn't."
While Khan has been championed by progressives for her aggressive efforts to curb corporate greed and the relentless monopolistic consolidations that have harmed consumers and the broader economy, Cuban criticized her antitrust actions as counterproductive.
"By trying to break up the biggest tech companies, you risk our ability to be the best in artificial intelligence," Cuban claimed, according to reporting by Semafor. "The bigger picture," he added, is that Khan is "hurting more than she's helping."
Following Cuban's reported comments, Sanders—who recently traveled with Khan in Texas to talk with voters about the threat of corporate power and how the working class can better confront it—came to her defense.
"Mark Cuban is wrong," Sanders tweeted Tuesday night in response. "Lina Khan is the best FTC Chair in modern history."
"By taking on corporate greed and illegal monopolies," Sanders continued, the current FTC chair "is doing an exceptional job preventing large corporations from ripping-off consumers and exploiting workers."
Other progressives, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Working Families Party national director Maurice Mitchell, also weighed in.
"Let me make this clear," Ocasio-Cortez declared Wednesday, "since billionaires have been trying to play footsie with the ticket: Anyone goes near Lina Khan and there will be an out and out brawl. And that is a promise. She proves this admin fights for working people. It would be terrible leadership to remove her."
Last month, Fortune reported that many "billionaire donors" of Harris' presidential campaign—including Cuban and Barry Diller, chairman of IAC—were lobbying behind the scenes to have Khan replaced if she takes the White House.
In July, Common Dreams noted the backlash many of these same billionaire donors—who also include LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman and Netflix's Reed Hastings—received for going after Khan.
In an August column, progressive activist Jim Hightower warned about the billionaires within the Democratic coalition who had "knives out" for Khan.
"Khan is the first real antitrust champion America has had in years," wrote Hightower at the time. "But will leading Democrats have the guts and integrity to defend her? Or will the business-as-usual powers be ushered back in?"
In a statement from an unnamed spokesperson released to Semafor, the FTC responded to Cuban's remarks by saying Khan believes "extreme consolidation" of large companies is damaging to U.S. economic progress.
"Chair Khan believes choosing competition over centralized corporate control of markets is the path to letting the best ideas win," the spokesperson said.
Sanders concluded his Tuesday rebuke of Cuban by thanking Khan directly for "what you are doing."
Update: This piece has been updated from its original to include new public comment from Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez.
Keep ReadingShow Less
NYT Gives 'Whining' Megadonors a Platform to Push Harris Against Taxing the Rich
"I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you that Wall Street billionaires and Silicon Valley tech bros are trying to convince a presidential candidate to abandon her commitment to tax them," said the chair of the Patriotic Millionaires.
Aug 30, 2024
The United States' "paper of record" gave ultra-rich investors and corporate executives a platform on Thursday to sound off against Vice President Kamala Harris' support for a tax on unrealized capital gains, a popular proposal that has stirred howls of complaint from Silicon Valley elites whom Harris used to represent in the Senate.
The New York Times story—headlined "Donors Quietly Push Harris to Drop Tax on Ultrawealthy"—quotes billionaire investor Mark Cuban; Aaron Levie, CEO of the cloud storage firm Box; Charles Myers, the founder of Signum Global Advisors; and others who have backed Harris' presidential bid.
"In my interactions with them, the key is she focuses on her values and is not an ideologue about any particular program," Cuban told the Times, which described him as one of the donors close to Harris who doesn't "believe she is that committed" to taxing billionaire wealth.
"From what I've been told," said Cuban, "everything is on the table, nothing's been decided yet."
Levie, who has donated $30,000 to Harris' campaign, said Silicon Valley leaders he has spoken with about the proposed tax on unrealized capital gains see the idea as "quite punitive."
"There's optimism that this can't possibly be real," said Levie. "Most people are waiting to hear from the Harris campaign. Is this a real proposal that is actually being pushed for—or was this something that was inherited from Biden?"
"The only thing at stake here is the remarkably fragile egos of billionaires who are on the verge of realizing they might not be saving civilization for anyone, including themselves."
The Times noted Friday that a group of wealthy Harris supporters known as "VCs for Kamala" found in a survey of its members that "roughly 75% of respondents agreed with the statement 'taxing unrealized capital gains will stifle innovation.'" The group includes billionaire LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman and billionaire investor Chris Sacca.
The Patriotic Millionaires, a group of rich Americans who support higher taxes on the wealthy, issued a statement Friday criticizing both the "whining" megadonors and the Times for handing them a megaphone to attack efforts to rein in billionaire tax dodging.
"I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you that Wall Street billionaires and Silicon Valley tech bros are trying to convince a presidential candidate to abandon her commitment to tax them, and using their own alleged brilliance to justify it," said Morris Pearl, the chair of the Patriotic Millionaires. "I admire their chutzpah in claiming that taxing unrealized capital gains will stifle innovation!"
"Claiming that making a billionaire pay taxes on their second billion will reduce innovation is as absurd as the rooster claiming the sun won't rise without his crowing," Pearl added. "The billionaires I know were all highly motivated to earn their first billion. The only thing at stake here is the remarkably fragile egos of billionaires who are on the verge of realizing they might not be saving civilization for anyone, including themselves."
The Patriotic Millionaires also suggested some adjustments to the Times headline:
Some (Silly/Misinformed) Donors Quietly (although not actually all that quietly; it was reported on the front page of the NYT after all) Push Harris to Drop (Modest Compared to What it Should Be) Tax on Ultra-Wealthy While Other (Much More Sensible and, yes, More Patriotic) Donors Loudly Push Billionaires to Drop Opposition to Common Sense.
The Harris campaign has voiced support for the tax proposals outlined in President Joe Biden's most recent budget blueprint, including a tax on the unrealized capital gains accumulated by individuals with net worths exceeding $100 million—a portion of the nation's upper class that contains fewer than 11,000 people.
Under the nation's current tax structure, billionaires are able to dodge taxes by never or rarely selling stock positions, which are not taxed until they are "realized."
Gabriel Zucman, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley and a leading advocate of a tax on billionaire wealth, has applauded the Harris campaign for embracing the proposed levy on the unrealized capital gains of the ultra-wealthy.
In a May op-ed in the Times, Zucman noted that U.S. billionaires paid a lower effective tax rate than working-class Americans for the first time in the nation's history in 2018.
"The idea that billionaires should pay a minimum amount of income tax is not a radical idea," Zucman wrote at the time. "What is radical is continuing to allow the wealthiest people in the world to pay a smaller percentage in income tax than nearly everybody else."
"In liberal democracies, a wave of political sentiment is building, focused on rooting out the inequality that corrodes societies," the economist added. "A coordinated minimum tax on the superrich will not fix capitalism. But it is a necessary first step."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular