Billionaires in Politics: Progress vs. Democracy

By  V MURDAYA ‘27

Billionaire. When one hears the word, they envision massive corporations, unimaginable wealth, and an endless bank account. These individuals wield immense financial power, seemingly securing their and their family’s futures indefinitely. But does their wealth automatically translate into their power to control the people of their country? Not necessarily. While billionaires control the livelihoods of countless employees, their money alone doesn’t grant them the authority to create or implement policies. However, it does not necessarily mean that many don’t try. Whether through shady dealings with political figures, securing favorable policies and bills for their companies in exchange for a large wad of cash, or announcing their running as a political candidate for a presidential or parliament seat, there are various methods one might intend to gain political power.

The first strategy billionaires implement to gain power is their indirect influence on prominent political figureheads. This comes in a range of methods. The most obvious ones are those that directly involve handing them a fat check. Politicians need money to campaign, of course. And most of the time, people with deep pockets serve to fund them. In fact, according to Axios, during the presidential election last year, 150 billionaire families collectively donated nearly $2 billion to both sides of the election. The reasons for these “donations” vary. For some, such as Bill Gates, backing a certain figure reinforces their public image. For others, it is simply because said politician would help them in their business endeavors by passing favorable policies. Another method billionaires use is to manipulate the media in order to sway users to side with their political beliefs. Some major media conglomerates, such as Fox Corporation, Disney, Comcast, the Boston Globe, and the Washington Post are all owned by billionaires. Therefore, it is easy for them to broadcast or display a skewed recount of the news, coercing viewers to subconsciously pick a side in politics. 

The second strategy billionaires use is to, well, to be a politicians themselves. This is not uncommon. Based on Northwestern Now, 11 percent of billionaires in the world now hold or are seeking political office. Their reasoning is similar to the first. However, there are some key differences, particularly surrounding their reputation. Dealing with politicians behind the scenes allows one to obscure their identity if needed to, and mishaps or problems within these parties would not be their responsibility. However, running as a representative of these parties shifts all the blame on the billionaires themselves. Despite this, some find it more useful, as they can directly influence governmental activities and bypass intermediaries, and push it to benefit their own agendas. It also has a more immediate impact on their legacy. If these billionaire politicians serve to benefit the people, they would directly attribute their welfare to their leaders, this being the billionaires. This ensures that their legacies extend beyond their business dealings.

Now that we’ve established that billionaires do in fact exist in political circles, the pervading question is: Is their impact good or bad for us? While the answer, like many others, is convoluted, I would admit to say, it’s closer to being a good thing. 

To clarify, I believe that billionaires have had their fair share of controversy in politics. Their self-serving agendas could push down certain stimulus packages, squash corporate competition, or exacerbate income inequalities by lowering high-income tax rates. However, I believe that, for the greater good of society, billionaires’ presence in politics is beneficial.

The first way billionaires can positively impact politics is by running a country the way they run a corporation — with efficiency, strategic planning, and a results-driven mindset. Think of how mega-businesses operate: minimizing waste, maximizing productivity, and ensuring methodical time management. While this approach often comes with tough decisions, criticism, and at times, limitations on certain freedoms, it ultimately benefits the majority by fostering economic stability and growth. Singapore is a prime example of this philosophy in action. Though it gained independence as a small, resource-scarce nation, its government — often compared to a highly efficient corporate structure — leveraged its strategic location, disciplined policies, and strict governance to transform the country into an economic powerhouse. With firm leadership, calculated decision-making, and a relentless focus on economic progress, Singapore has been able to drive innovation, utilize its advantageous trading location, and maintain a high standard of living. This mirrors how many billionaire-led businesses operate. Billionaire politicians bring a similar no-nonsense, results-oriented approach — prioritizing economic expansion, job creation, and investment opportunities. They understand global markets, have experience managing large-scale operations, and often push policies that stimulate business growth, benefiting the economy as a whole. While there are concerns about authoritarian tendencies, monopolistic control, or prioritizing profit over social welfare, the corporate efficiency model they champion can lead to rapid development, infrastructure improvements, and long-term economic stability. 

Akin to Singapore’s government, corruption is rarer among billionaires. With a corruption rating of 83, it ranks as the fifth least corrupt country in the world. There are many reasons for this. However, most important is the fact that they are paid well. As stated in SmartWealth.sg, the Prime Minister of Singapore earns roughly $2.25 million a year, while its cabinet ministers earn between $1 million to $2 million a year. This disincentivizes them from engaging in bribery and embezzlement, as their substantial pay makes sure that the risk-to-reward ratio of these actions would be far higher. This applies to billionaires as well. Their prior wealth before entering politics makes them more immune to lobbying efforts or behind-the-table dealings, while their financial freedom allows them to act independently. It is good to note, however, this mainly applies to billionaires who made their money independently from politics.

Lastly, billionaires are often more inclined to make a philanthropic impact, whether as a genuine commitment to social change or as a strategic move to enhance their public image. Regardless of intent, their ability to drive large-scale societal reform is undeniable — something that traditional politicians, often constrained by budget limitations, simply cannot achieve on their own. The scope of their influence is evident in cases such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which has provided humanitarian aid on a global scale. Similarly, Michael Bloomberg’s public health initiatives, including anti-smoking campaigns and climate policies, required significant financial backing to be effectively implemented. In both instances, these billionaires had to either hold political office or collaborate with governments to translate their wealth into actionable policies. 

All in all, it is evident that billionaires have a pervasive hand in politics, influencing policies both behind the scenes and directly through elected office. While concerns about self-interest, monopolistic control, and democratic fairness are valid, their presence is not entirely detrimental, and they serve to give more good than harm to society. Their ability to run governments efficiently, reduce corruption through financial independence, and accelerate large-scale social change makes them a force that can, under the right circumstances, drive progress. The challenge lies in ensuring transparency, accountability, and a balance of power — so that billionaires in politics serve not just their own interests, but the interests of society as a whole.