Photograph by Silverwell Films / Getty images
On the morning of Wednesday, November 6, Donald Trump made history as the first convicted felon to become president of the United States. As the nation awakes to the news, the result also highlights the profound influence of billionaire donors, whose presence loomed large over the election cycle.
This moment reflects a trend set in motion over a decade ago. In January 2010, the Supreme Court changed the landscape of political campaigning by removing finance restrictions on U.S. elections. This decision enabled corporations to spend unlimited cash on ads, as long as they weren’t formally “co-ordinating” with parties.
Retrospectively, this landmark was the first step towards today’s billionaire-ification of U.S. politics. For the 2024 election, a staggering $15.9 billion was spent on ads and campaigning by both Democrats and Republicans, making it the most expensive election in history; in just one week, nearly $1 billion was poured into political ads.
It’s not just the sheer scale of the political ad spend that’s worrying, it’s the disproportionate influence of billionaires. Eighteen percent of all political ad funding came straight from the pockets of a tiny handful of America’s mega-rich. In fact, according to USA Today, Harris had 83 billionaires supporting her—making up 6% of her campaign funds, according to Al Jazeera—while 52 backed Trump, but they were extremely generous donors, making up 34% of his total campaign fund.
In other words: the country’s wealthiest bankrolled the election, wielding political power and influence like never before. Not only is this bad news for democracy, it’s catastrophic for the planet.
Besides candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, the main character of this election has been Elon Musk. Every day between October 19th and November 5th, the billionaire gave $1 million to a voter who signed his effectively pro-Trump petition in seven key swing states. This giveaway resulted in Musk and his political committee being sued by Philadelphia’s District Attorney, who called the giveaway program “an illegal lottery that violates state consumer protection laws.” Musk is a vocal advocate for free speech and gun rights. Decked out in his “Dark MAGA” hat—a black version of the red original—he stood by Trump’s side at rallies across the country, fist-pumping and jumping with joy.
In total, Musk pledged approximately $120 million to the Trump campaign, making him the second-largest backer. According to The New York Times, Musk also used his social media platform, X, to spread election misinformation, to the extent that NBC described X as a “pro-Trump echo chamber.” By contrast, Mark Zuckerberg seemingly distanced Meta from political content, making no move to correct misleading political ads like he did in 2020—he also made public remarks that implicitly endorse right-wing narratives about “censorship,” while also expressing admiration for Donald Trump.
The country’s wealthiest bankrolled the election, wielding political power and influence like never before.
Now that Trump has emerged victorious, Musk stands to make huge gains from his financial support of the former president. According to Politico, Trump promised Musk he can lead a “Department of Governmental Efficiency,” a deliberately vague role which could hand Musk serious political power. Already, Musk has said he could use the role to take $2 trillion from the federal budget.
Huge donations are funneled through so-called Super PACs, Political Action Committees that can spend unlimited cash on ads, “expressly advocating” for or against certain candidates even though they’re technically independent and unaffiliated with any party. The likes of America PAC (established by Musk) and MAGA PAC fund Republicans, whereas Democrats received around $700 million from the “secretive… ad-testing factory” Future Forward PAC, bankrolled by billionaires like Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz and Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings.
These Super PACs can use billionaire wealth to demolish entire campaigns. Sam Pizzigati, a veteran labor journalist who co-edits the Inequality newsletter of the Institute of Policy Studies, cites the ruthless targeting of California’s Democratic primary candidate Katie Porter by the Republican-supporting, crypto-affiliated Fairshake PAC as an example of “naked power” in action.
Porter is known for her succinct takedowns of the mega-rich, but she had “never really paid any attention to crypto,” Pizzigati tells Atmos. Despite this, “[Fairshake] spent a fantastically high amount of money” to derail her campaign, releasing ads decrying her as a “liar” and a “bully.” Pizzigati says they “made up charges” to discredit Porter, and the crypto billionaires behind the Super PAC did so successfully. Despite initially polling well, she finished third place in the California primary race.
Crucially, Porter sits on the House Committee on Natural Resources, and has been vocal about the devastating and worsening impacts of the climate crisis. Porter’s manifesto promises to “confront Big Oil,” “hold polluters accountable,” and invest in clean energy. This could spell disaster for cryptocurrency, which relies on energy-intensive mining—a fact which contributes to the targeted, billionaire-funded takedown of her progressive, climate-focused campaign.
Pizzigati says the climate crisis was an “invisible issue” in this election cycle, and that’s not accidental. Billionaires wield huge influence on mainstream media, essentially dictating which issues are spotlit. Staff at Washington Post and LA Times were blocked by their billionaire owners from publishing pro-Harris editorials, a move that many saw as their respective attempts to “curry favor” with Trump, and Pizzigati similarly points to think tanks as a key, similarly biased, shaper of public discourse. “Think tanks put out position papers which define what is ‘important’ in American society, and think tank money comes from billionaires. They’re dominating respectable discourse about what issues we should be addressing,” he says.
“Billionaires are using their political power to delay the changes that we need to reduce the climate impact of these dangerous sectors.”
Again, the climate crisis is low on this list of priorities because billionaire wealth requires the unregulated and unchecked growth of highly polluting industries. This wealth, then, fuels extravagant spending on private jets, luxury yachts and palatial mansions. According to 2023 research conducted by Oxfam and reported by The Guardian, “twelve of the world’s wealthiest billionaires produce more greenhouse gasses… than the annual energy emissions of two million homes.”
There are now more billionaires in the world than ever before. Globally, income inequality is continuously worsening, and the climate crisis is inextricably tied to this chasm between rich and poor. Demand for cobalt—a key material used to make mobile phones—has resulted in the widespread deforestation of the Democratic Republic of Congo, as well as lethal working conditions and increasingly well-documented human rights violations. The ever-churning machine of fast fashion is turning once-beautiful deserts into sartorial wastelands, whereas gas and oil companies have been privately lobbying to downplay the true carbon footprint of their industries for decades.
In the case of characters like Musk, they’re de facto politicians themselves. “Donald Trump is letting Elon Musk manage his entire field operation,” says Pizzigati. “He has outsourced his campaigning to billionaires.” This means that the changes needed to lessen inequality—taxing the rich, focusing on rebuilding and strengthening unions—are rarely mentioned.
This isn’t one-sided, either. Kamala Harris invited stars like Beyoncé and Cardi B to speak at her campaign rallies, hoping that the endorsements of mega-rich A-list celebrities could sway public opinion. Aside from Beyoncé’s $4 million pledge, these superstar co-signs were just endorsements, not donations—and notably, they weren’t promised a say in shaping the U.S. government, unlike Trump’s deal with Musk.
Today, after months of the ultra-wealthy dictating political talking points through media control, think tank reports, and ruthlessly targeted ads in the lead-up to election day, the billionaire-ification of U.S. politics is on full display. Trump won, and so did Musk. The result is emblematic of a political climate shaped by the mega-rich, who stand to gain from tax breaks, lack of regulation, union-busting, and environmental exploitation and destruction.
Similarly, Pizzigati describes the worsening climate crisis as “a consequence of our economic distribution of wealth.” The rich pollute without restriction in their mission to generate and hoard millions and billions of dollars, while the poor suffer the ravages of the climate crisis. These tactics are no longer secret. It is, he concludes, crystal clear that billionaires are “using their political power to delay the changes that we need to reduce the climate impact of these dangerous sectors.”
Join our membership community. Support our work, receive a complimentary subscription to Atmos Magazine, and more.
The Billionaire-ification of the U.S. Election
