House Democrats have 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, by attempting to subpoena him and introducing legislation to block him from receiving federal contracts while he holds a “special” role inside the government. They believe the idea of an unelected billionaire wreaking chaos on the bureaucracy will be unpopular with voters — and now they have some data to prove it.

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. His approval rating is upside down (43 percent approve to 51 disapprove) and his favorability is even worse (42 percent favorable to 51 percent unfavorable).

And the survey was completed between Jan. 19-25 — before some of Musk’s more extreme moves as the leader of the Department of Government Efficiency.

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 Fund 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.”

Democrats have been in the midst of a deep soul search, trying to figure out how they lost the White House, both chambers of Congress and the working-class voters that had once been the backbone of their party. The Democratic resistance has been muted in the open weeks of Donald Trump’s second term as its members struggle to land on a common theme.

But Musk’s frenzied campaign to eliminate waste and lower spending has rocked the federal bureaucracy. And in recent days, Democrats have seized on Musk and other wealthy members of Trump’s administration as a way to make their case to the working class.

The poll, conducted by the Democratic firm Impact Research, also found that Musk evoked strong negative feelings. Of the 51 percent who viewed him unfavorably, 41 percent found him “very unfavorable.” Of the 51 percent who disapproved of him, 43 percent did so strongly.

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee moved to subpoena tech billionaire and Trump ally Elon Musk at a hearing Wednesday — and one Democrat was conspicuously and missing from the vote, Rep. Ro Khanna of California, who represents Silicon Valley and has a longtime relationship with the billionaire.

Khanna said he missed the vote and said he was unaware it was happening — but three Democrats familiar with the run-up to the vote who were granted anonymity to describe what ensued said Democrats were given a heads-up about the maneuver to try to catch Republicans by surprise. Khanna, they said, knew they vote was happening and made an intentional decision to miss it.

In the end, the motion to subpoena Musk was shut down by Republicans on the committee on a 20-19 vote — with eight lawmakers missing the vote, including Democrats Khanna and Rep. Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.), who missed for an unrelated reason, one Democrat familiar with the planning said.

The rest of the members who missed were Republicans.

Khanna disputed the characterization that he missed the vote on purpose, saying on X that he “would have voted yes.”

“They called a procedural vote without notice & I like 8 others didn’t make it there on time,” he said in a post. “Musk’s attacks on our institutions are unconstitutional. He should be subpoenaed & answer to our committee. They should call the vote again with notice.”

Musk responded to Khanna’s post, writing to him, “Don’t be a dick.”

The three Democrats familiar with the planning said Khanna’s staff was properly notified about the vote ahead of time.

One senior Democratic aide said there was a member meeting Tuesday evening that Khanna missed to discuss the motions for a subpoena. Democrats also announced the motion to all staff and his staff was present on that call — and that the top Democrat on Oversight, Gerry Connolly, told the Democratic Caucus about the plan this morning, two people said.

Elon Musk has a critical ally in Congress as he tries to slash federal bureaucracy at a break-neck pace: Rep. Jim Jordan.

The billionaire tech executive and the Ohio conservative hardliner have grown increasingly close since first being introduced by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy shortly after Musk’s takeover of Twitter in late 2022. Musk and Jordan, who chairs House Judiciary, talk roughly once a month, according to a person with knowledge of their relationship granted anonymity to speak candidly. And Jordan has already helped Musk advance a number of his goals since they became acquainted.

Now, the friendship is set to help both men further their personal and political agendas in Trump’s Washington.

For Musk, Jordan has a big say over legislation that could pave the way for more legal immigration in the high-skilled work sector, benefitting Musk’s business interests — to say nothing of Jordan’s subpoena power to go after Musk’s enemies. For Jordan, a direct line to Musk is a chance to bolster his bonafides with the conservative movement that considers the Tesla founder a hero.

“This guy, you could argue, was the single biggest — had the single biggest influence — on saving and protecting free speech and the First Amendment, for goodness’ sake,” Jordan said in an interview. “God bless Elon Musk.”

Jordan and Musk met at least twice post-election, first on Capitol Hill and then at Mar-a-Lago, Jordan said. In Washington, the two men discussed social media platforms, Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency and the Judiciary Committee’s work digging into the Biden administration’s Federal Trade Commission.

The meetings marked early opportunities for Jordan and Musk to explore how their dynamic was about to change as Republicans took control of Congress and the executive branch under President Donald Trump. Jordan’s committee has jurisdiction over a number of Musk’s primary political and policy interests, including immigration, deregulation, antitrust and the policing of social media platforms like X and its competitors.

As Musk focuses on reducing spending and regulations, “We can be helpful,” Jordan said.

Jordan is planning to use the Judiciary Committee to scrutinize companies and government officials that have allegedly suppressed conservative voices, including in Europe. Jordan last week sent a letter to the European Commission’s chief tech regulator inquiring about how it plans to enforce social media law against American companies, like X.

And despite being a hardliner on immigration, Jordan now says he’s open to working with Musk on legislation paving the way for more high-skilled immigrants to live and work in the country, although he has said they have not yet spoken about the topic. The debate over expanding “H-1B visas” for this purpose has long been a point of friction for conservatives who want to support emerging tech industries without being accused of displacing domestic workers.

“[We’ve] got to secure the border first,” Jordan said in an interview last month. “Once you’ve demonstrated that the border is actually secure, then we can entertain questions about the other key issues … whether it’s H1-B visas or other visas.”

Musk did not respond to a request for comment nor did a spokesperson for DOGE. Judiciary Committee spokesperson Nadgey Louis-Charles said the panel’s work on free speech issues started years ago.

“The Judiciary Committee’s investigation into censorship, which started in the 117th Congress, is all about defending the First Amendment and protecting free speech,” she said. “We’re standing up against any effort to silence Americans, and we’ve shown conclusively how Democrats colluded with Big Tech to censor Americans.”

But Jordan’s work has involved him wielding the gavel in Musk’s defense, such as when he called a Justice Department official in 2023 to testify over the government’s lawsuit against SpaceX, one of Musk’s companies, for allegedly discriminating in hiring against refugees and asylum seekers.

Jordan asked the official to testify after SpaceX raised the issue with Jordan’s office directly, according to a person granted anonymity to discuss the relationship between Jordan and Musk.

Their collaboration also culminated in the shutdown of the Global Alliance for Responsible Media. That coalition, which went by the acronym GARM, was a project of the World Federation of Advertisers that sought to fight “harmful” content online in the wake of the 2019 mass shooting at New Zealand mosques, which was partially livestreamed on Facebook.

GARM caught Musk’s ire when advertisers reportedly pulled back spending on X. Jordan said he’d never heard of the group before, but that he launched a Judiciary Committee inquiry after Musk told him about it.

A July 2024 staff report from the Judiciary Committee, which adapted Musk’s “GARM is Harm” catchphrase for its title, charged that the coalition had seemingly “anti-democratic views of fundamental American freedom” and likely coordinated illegally to flout antitrust laws. Shortly afterward, Musk’s X sued the World Federation of Advertisers over antitrust violations and GARM quickly dissolved, maintaining its innocence but conceding its resources had been drained.

“When they announced they were going out of business, I called Elon up and said, ‘It all started with your one sentence — when you, Kevin [McCarthy], and I met — and you told me, ‘GARM is harm,’” Jordan said.

Rep. Gerry Connolly, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee who was blocked Wednesday from issuing a subpoena to force Musk to testify on Capitol Hill, said he was alarmed by the Musk-Jordan partnership.

“Elon Musk is an unelected, unaccountable billionaire with absolutely zero knowledge of how government works and rampant conflicts of interest,” the Virginia Democrat said in a statement. “He should be the subject of congressional investigations, not a beneficiary of politically motivated investigations into his opponents and competitors.”

When asked why Musk’s influence on Blue Light News was justified, Jordan said Musk deserved to be listened to as a leader on fighting censorship — plus, “he’s got the confidence of the president of the United States.”

“So I think that’s the key thing,” he added. “The guy who got elected by 77 million Americans wants him in this role.”

Jordan and Musk first entered into a “mind meld” — according to one former associate of Musk granted anonymity to talk about their relationship — following Musk’s acquisition of Twitter. McCarthy introduced the two men, who had a shared interest in the alleged suppression of speech on social media platforms.

Jordan had for years been railing against “Big Tech” and its treatment of conservatives. Musk’s Twitter takeover offered some momentum for the cause. Musk seemed particularly excited about someone in Congress focusing so closely on the issue, said the former Musk associate.

All signs indicate that Jordan’s efforts to go after Musk’s adversaries will only continue to escalate. Jordan has even floated plans to work with the State Department to restrict entry into the U.S. by individuals and entities with track records of suppressing speech.

In the meantime, Jordan said he’s glad to come to Musk’s defense.

“What he’s done on … stopping censorship,” said Jordan, “has just been phenomenal.”