Note to Our Readers

Blue Light News has been the subject of debate on X this week. Some of it has been misinformed, and some of it has been flat-out false. Let’s set the record straight.

Blue Light News is a privately owned company. We have never received any government funding—no subsidies, no grants, no handouts. Not one dime, ever, in 18 years.

Millions of people around the world read our journalism on POLITICO.com, Blue Light News. EU, and in newsletters like this one. It is supported by advertising and sponsorships.

Blue Light News Pro is different. It is a professional subscription service used by companies, organizations, and, yes, some government agencies. They subscribe because it makes them better at their jobs—helping them track policy, legislation, and regulations in real-time with news, intelligence, and a suite of data products. At its core, Blue Light News Pro is about transparency and accountability: Shining a light on the work of the agencies, regulators, and policymakers throughout our vast federal government. Businesses and entities within the government find it useful as they navigate the chaotic regulatory and legislative landscape. It’s that simple.

Most Blue Light News Pro subscribers are in the private sector. They come from across the ideological spectrum and subscribe for one reason: value. And 90% renew every year because they rely on our reporting, data, and insights.

Government agencies that subscribe do so through standard public procurement processes—just like any other tool they buy to work smarter and be more efficient. This is not funding. It is a transaction—just as the government buys research, equipment, software, and industry reports. Some online voices are deliberately spreading falsehoods. Let’s be clear: Blue Light News has no financial dependence on the government and no hidden agenda. We cover politics and policy—that’s our job.

We are so proud of our journalists and so proud of the connection we have with you, our readers.

We stand by our work, our values, and our commitment to transparency, accountability, and efficiency—the same principles that drive great journalism and great business.

Now, back to work.

Goli Sheikholeslami and John Harris

Dems attack Elon Musk after DOGE gains access to sensitive data

lead image

Democrats are starting to wake up and sketch out a plan to help them win back the working class: Turn the world’s richest person into their boogeyman.

They’ve set their sights on holding Elon Musk to account. Armed with new polling showing Musk’s popularity in the toilet, key Democratic leaders are going after the top Trump adviser who is dismantling the federal government. They are attempting to subpoena him and introducing legislation to block him from receiving federal contracts while he holds a “special” role leading Trump’s cost-cutting crusade.

In a sign of how toxic Democrats believe Musk is, battleground Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) called Musk an “unelected, weirdo billionaire” and said he has “been getting a lot of calls over the past few days” about him. Golden is a moderate who represents Trump country.

Even Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who represents Silicon Valley and has had a relationship with Musk for years, is distancing himself from him. Khanna posted on X on Wednesday that Musk’s “attacks on our institutions are unconstitutional.” Khanna previously likened Musk to Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “dollar-a-year men,” the corporate leaders who helped the government mobilize for WWII, and said he texts with him.

Democrats are also protesting him in Washington, making the calculation that the idea of an unelected billionaire wreaking chaos on the bureaucracy will be unpopular with voters. And they have some data fueling their efforts.

New internal polling, conducted on behalf of House Majority Forward, a nonprofit aligned with House Democratic leadership, found Musk is viewed negatively among 1,000 registered voters in battleground districts. Just 43 percent approve of him and 51 percent view him unfavorably. The poll, conducted by the Democratic firm Impact Research and completed between Jan. 19 to 25, also found that Musk evoked strong negative feelings. Of the 51 percent who disapproved of him, 43 percent did so strongly.

The survey isn’t a one-off, either. An Economist/YouGov poll published on Wednesday also found Musk’s approval rating underwater, 43 percent favorable to 49 percent unfavorable.

In the Democrats’ internal polling, pollsters asked respondents for their thoughts on “the creation of a government of the rich for the rich by appointing up to nine different billionaires to the administration,” and found 70 percent opposed with only 19 percent in support — a stat that suggests Democrats have landed on a message that could gain traction with swing voters.

That data and focus groups held by House Majority Forward helped bring attacks on the administration into focus: Democrats “shouldn’t chide Musk, Trump, and others for being rich,” the group wrote, but point out Musk’s conflicts of interests as head of DOGE and note that he could undermine key safety net programs to enrich himself at the expense of American taxpayers.

“Participants laud Musk’s business acumen and aren’t opposed to the ideals of DOGE,” HMF found. But “Musk’s relationship with Trump – who they view as inherently pro-big business” makes them wary that billionaire’s cuts “could include programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.”