Access exclusive content via Gulf News WhatsApp

Among the rich list, there is someone who has become the center of attention this election season: Elon Musk, whose fortune is estimated at $ 270.3 billion (October 1, 2024).

They are power players, members of America’s financial elite who pull the strings of U.S. policy. Each is a powerful influence, their support poised to tip the scales in one of the most financially charged elections in U.S. history.

Over the past few weeks, the CEO of Tesla and Space X has been supporting the Trump campaign financially through his America PAC, as well as personally at campaign rallies.

Billionaires’ spending on the 2024 US election campaign has already reached record levels; estimates show that donations from ultra-rich Americans will likely exceed previous years by billions of dollars.

As of early October 2024, super PACs and outside spending groups have contributed approximately $2.6 billion to the campaign. Washington Post. The OpenSecrets blog predicts total spending for the 2024 election will reach approximately $15.9 billion, exceeding the $15.1 billion in the 2020 election (even before adjusting for inflation).

Is the billionaire’s emergence good or bad for Trump?

Musk’s relationship with Trump (and whether the billionaire helped or hindered the former president’s campaign) has been scrutinized by US political experts.

Last week, a survey of Yahoo Finance users of all political backgrounds was conducted to explore the question: “Does Elon Musk’s support for Donald Trump make you more likely to vote for Trump or less likely to vote for Trump?”

25 percent of those surveyed said Musk would make them more likely to vote for Trump, while 28 percent said Musk would make them less likely to vote for Trump.

The survey results were featured on the latest episode of Capitol Gains, hosted by Rachelle Akuffo, Washington Correspondent Ben Werschkul and Yahoo Finance senior columnist Rick Newman.

“One of the takeaways here is to pay attention to which billionaires are supporting you,” says Newman. “Elon Musk’s relationship with Donald Trump doesn’t seem like an obvious win for Trump.”

When isolating undecided voters, 21 percent said Musk’s endorsement made them more likely to vote for Trump, but 28 percent said it made them less likely, creating a net negative effect of seven points.

Democrats’ polling group Blueprint also surveyed young men (ages 18-29), whom Kamala Harris has a hard time reaching and where Trump has an advantage.

This group noted that Musk’s involvement made them slightly less likely to support Trump; This suggested that high-profile endorsements may not have a universally positive impact.

Since both Trump and Musk are known for their strong and distinct personalities, their alliance could sway Republican voters who are still undecided.

In a close race focused on key swing states like Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, even small shifts in undecided voter preferences could mean a lot in the final days.

Billionaire involvement in politics is not new, but the 2024 campaign has taken it to a higher level by highlighting the influence of this elite group.

Musk is vocal about his political preferences. His wealth gives him the potential to use resources that amplify messages that support his political stance.

Other billionaires, such as Thiel and Harlan Crow, have also strategically invested in campaigns, political action committees (PACs), and candidates that align with their ideological views. This infusion of capital has important implications: as candidates backed by these influential donors gain access to resources, media platforms, and visibility beyond what grassroots support typically provides.

Ideally, democratic elections are designed to give every voter an equal say. The presence of billionaires backing candidates could disrupt this balance and raise concerns about the health of US democracy.

When billionaires contribute heavily to campaigns, they can overshadow grassroots donors and voter-driven support. This imbalance means candidates may prioritize the interests of their big donors over the general electorate; This creates a system in which policy choices are influenced by wealth rather than widespread popular support.

Large donations often come with expectations. Billionaires who contribute significant sums can expect their interests to be protected or promoted through policy decisions. For example, tech moguls may push for deregulation, lower taxes on capital gains, or loosening of antitrust laws that could serve corporate rather than public interests.

When voters perceive that billionaire-backed candidates are primarily beholden to the interests of their biggest funders, trust in the electoral process declines. This skepticism can reduce voter turnout because people feel their voices carry less weight compared to powerful donors.

There is a growing call for campaign finance reform to eliminate the influence of wealthy donors. Solutions may include:

Donation limits: Placing tighter limits on individual contributions could help level the playing field.

Increased transparency: In particular, requiring disclosure of all donations to PACs could allow voters to see who is funding a campaign and why.

Public campaign financing: Encouraging public financing for candidates can make campaigns less dependent on private sources and help restore public confidence.

Because billionaires wield so much influence, it becomes imperative for policymakers and voters to address the challenges this trend poses to fair and representative elections.

Campaign finance reform, transparency, and efforts to curb excessive wealth-driven influence may be necessary to ensure that democracy remains a government “by the people, for the people” rather than one shaped by the wealthiest few.