Anti-Corruption and Affordability: Two Great Tastes That Taste Great Together

In a wave election that would have been unthinkable just two years ago, Democrats have retaken both chambers of Congress with substantial majorities. Virtually every district in the country swung to the left, with Democratic wins in deep-red areas of the South and Midwest. The results make 2018’s blue wave look more like a ripple.

So how did Democrats blow their 2018 performance out of the water? Part of the explanation is Donald Trump himself. Trump 1.0 featured historic turnover rates in his cabinet and senior staff, an impeachment, draconian treatment of detained immigrants, and an endless stream of controversies sparked by the president’s erratic and offensive statements. The first two years of Trump 2.0 have been more of the same, only much more extreme, plus a tariff war with the world and a hot war with Iran that jacked up the price of gas and diesel.

However, in the 2026 race, unlike prior elections in the Trump era, Democrats’ focus was not on his very real threats to democracy or Trump’s boorish statements. Instead, Democrats across the country relentlessly hammered two issues, corruption and affordability, and framed these issues as inextricably linked. “Corruption is why things don’t work for the American people,” said Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) in a campaign video. Sen.-elect James Talarico (D-TX) told rallygoers in Texas that billionaires and corrupt politicians were to blame for rising costs. Iowa’s senator-elect Josh Turek told voters, “We have a corruption crisis in this country, and it is leading to an affordability crisis,” during a debate against his opponent.

This is a framing that the Revolving Door Project has urged Democrats to adopt for years, first under the umbrella of a corporate crackdown when President Biden was in office, and later as a focus on the material harms of Trumpian corruption. As we wrote in the first edition of Corruption Calendar in January 2025, “Shady dealings between the wealthy and powerful and members of the federal government range from brazen to more secretive, but they influence the air we breathe, the water we drink, the price of housing and other necessities, and far more. We believe it is critical to provide the public with the knowledge to make direct connections between Trumpworld corruption and their daily lives.”

Democrats finally did so to great effect. Polling in the run-up to the election revealed the public believed the Trump family and billionaires/CEOs were the groups most involved in corruption. Exit polls showed that 90 percent of voters counted corruption as a factor in their vote. The economy consistently ranked among the top issues facing the country. Voters clearly elected Democrats in historic numbers with the hope and expectation that they will do something to address the interlinked corruption and cost-of-living crises.

Further proof of the mechanical connection between right-wing extremism, corruption, and economic problems, as well as the political potential in fighting them, can be found overseas. In Serbia, the protest movement that recently ousted local autocrat Aleksandar Vučić was touched off by a deadly railroad station collapse caused by a corrupt contractor who did shoddy work. This is the lesson of history: If you elect a right-wing extremist, they and their cronies will steal everything that isn’t nailed down, causing lasting economic damage.

But as Democrats decide how to wield newfound power, some within the coalition are already trying to pump the brakes. Chamber of Progress, a center-left think tank funded by every Big Tech corporation you can think of, wants Democrats to refrain from calling CEOs engaged in corruption before Congress. They quickly tried to spin the results as completely unrelated to the AI data center build-out championed by Trump and his allies, despite voters approving nearly every anti–data center ballot measure. Even Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, presumptive Speaker of the House for the 120th Congress, told MS NOW, “The American people don’t want us to get even, they want us to get things done on their behalf.”

This view is both out of step with public opinion and a mischaracterization of the role of congressional oversight. The public is clearly enraged by the culture of corruption that has long plagued Washington, and it has never been worse than it is now. Retrospective investigations into abuses of power and corrupt dealings are not getting even; it is about uncovering illegal activity and imposing accountability. Democrats should take a page out of their own book and again marry anti-corruption and affordability issues to guide their oversight agenda.

While the revolving door and fealty to donors are issues that prevent both parties from acting in the public interest, the past two years saw an unprecedented integration of corporate actors into the highest echelons of the federal government. The most prominent example was the AI industry, which was bolstered by the likes of David Sacks and Michael Kratsios guiding policy from the inside and executives like Nvidia’s Jensen Huang and xAI’s Elon Musk whispering in the president’s ear. Corruption may explain why Trump kept Huang in his inner circle even as intelligence reports accused him of having an affair with a Chinese spy who was apparently evading American export controls. The president also received millions from Big Tech for his inaugural fund, his ballroom, and his MAGA Inc. PAC.

This bargain benefited both sides. In exchange for their money, tech oligarchs got to build out their data centers and roll out their products with virtually no oversight or regulation from the federal government. People across the country, meanwhile, saw their utility bills soar and their air quality decline in order to power a product that, according to the people building it, has a nonzero chance of ending humanity within a decade.

There is also the pig trough of corruption Trump has set up himself, with his various cryptocurrency scams, shady deals, and mysteriously inflated wealth. In a recent interview with Ross Douthat—a conservative, mind you—Trump explained that his wealth had skyrocketed by $3 billion because he “had stock.” He even has a Vučić-style folly in the form of giving a no-bid contract to an incompetent crony to refinish the Reflecting Pool in D.C., which was an instant disaster, and still hasn’t been fixed.

Concretely, investigations should center the material costs that the administration’s policies are causing, while also seeking to uncover any corrupt dealings that may have shaped policy decisions. To do so, committee chairs must utilize their subpoena power to obtain documents and force CEOs and administration officials to testify before Congress. In being seen as a countervailing force to these elite actors, Congress can prove to Americans that it is serving the public interest rather than the highest bidder.

Additionally, these investigations will inspire ideas for corrective legislation and highlight the ways an executive branch with a spine could take on powerful oligarchs. Good oversight leads to good legislation and a better-informed consensus among both the public and politicians. As both parties gear up for a presidential election, and candidates contemplate the type of cabinet they would appoint, it is critical that Congress illuminate the mess that a new president will be inheriting.

Big Tech may be the most shameless participant in Trumpian corruption, but it is by no means the only guilty industry. Big Oil, for instance, is also right up there. Committees should rinse and repeat across industries, corporations, and individuals that sought to pay their way into the administration’s good graces. By focusing on the acts of corruption and the downstream, tangible harms it is having on the American people, congressional oversight can do more than “get even” with the administration and its collaborators. Instead, hard-hitting oversight can be a vehicle through which Congress builds the evidence, expertise, and broad-based public support to “get things done.” Prosecutions of lawbreakers inside and close to the Trump regime can provide a foundation for delivering substantive reforms to prevent future corruption and all of its associated costs.