Democratic campaigns are promising relief from high costs, while Republican campaigns and aligned groups have outspent their counterparts by $400 million so far this election cycle, according to AdImpact. The affordability contest is also about who can afford to shape the choices voters face.
At a debate this month, Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed said: “If we don't stop this war, if we don't stop it now, we are going to continue to watch as the Iranian regime chokeholds the Strait of Hormuz, making our energy prices higher. And you are going to pay for it both at the gas tank and at the grocery store.” He said voters bear the costs of war through higher energy and food prices.
Democrats are campaigning on affordability ahead of the Nov. 3 midterm elections. Their proposals cover housing costs, wages, benefits, health care, worker protections affected by artificial intelligence, universal child care, homebuilding, groceries and gasoline. But questions remain about how quickly Democrats could act if they gain power in Washington, and whether their plans would bring prices down.
Promises meet the machinery of government
North Carolina Democratic Senate nominee Roy Cooper is promoting his “Make Stuff Cost Less” plan. In July, he told voters, “we need to roll back these chaotic tariffs, and Congress needs to take back its constitutional authority on that — because that's ending up costing everyday people and small businesses.” Texas Senate candidate James Talarico has a “New American Dream” agenda and is scheduled to appear at a CNN & Jubilee Town Hall on Wednesday.
Sen. Ruben Gallego has unveiled a plan that includes a New Deal-style public service jobs program. Sen. Chuck Schumer could revive a detailed policy blueprint he introduced in January, when Republicans controlled the Senate. In June, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said the party's first bill, HR.1, would focus on affordability if Democrats won the majority. “It will be hyper-focused on driving down the high cost of living and of course fixing our broken health care system as a part of that,” he said.
A new Congress could try to halt supplemental spending for military operations in Iran, limit how broader military funds get spent, or overturn remaining tariffs. But those efforts run through institutions that can block them: President Donald Trump could veto legislation, while overturning tariffs could require a veto-proof two-thirds Senate majority. A war-powers dispute with Trump over the legality of the war could end in a constitutional impasse, not an end to the conflict.
The source points to a Democratic House's failure to stop the Iraq war after the party's 2006 midterm victory. A majority, then, didn't guarantee elected officials could halt a war. In the Senate, a narrow majority could leave Republicans able to block legislation unless Democrats secure 60 votes. Reconciliation bills can pass without overcoming a filibuster, but the president still holds veto power. President Barack Obama vetoed a Republican reconciliation bill in January 2016 that aimed to overturn the Affordable Care Act.
Campaign cash sets the terms
A CNN/SSRS poll in September found Democrats had a 7-point lead as the party Americans viewed as closest to their views on the economy. Yet 35% thought the party would have a mainly positive effect on the cost of living, and 27% said the same about their personal financial situation. The figures make plain the gap between being seen as closer and being trusted to improve people's finances.
CNN reported that Elon Musk has put at least $276 million into Republican midterm efforts since July. “The overwhelming money advantage that Republicans have, and that Elon Musk is turbocharging for them, doesn't seem to be altering the playing field,” David Chalian said. Republican spending includes Senate Leadership Fund, the President Donald Trump-allied MAGA Inc. and a super PAC bankrolled by Musk.
The Democratic-aligned Senate Majority PAC said it had resources to compete in nine battleground states. Communications director Lauren French said the group had posted record fundraising over the past three months, but “of course, more recess resources would be helpful.” She added: “We are being outspent by the Republicans. That's just a fact. In many of these states, they have really transactionalized elections, so they have monopoly money to play with, whereas we are working with real resources.”
A fundraising appeal by Rep. Chris Pappas, the Democratic Senate nominee in New Hampshire, said a pro-Trump PAC had reserved $10 million in advertising in the state the previous month and that Democrats were being outspent 3-to-1. American Bridge PAC had recently put more than $20 million into South Carolina and Kansas, as well as competitive races in Florida and Mississippi. A Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee memo asked for another $17 million by Oct. 22 “to close the sale” in races it called “winnable.”
The account focuses on candidates, campaigns and political groups competing for money and seats; it describes no grassroots organizing or mutual-aid response. One veteran Democratic Senate operative, who requested anonymity, summed up the campaign's constraint this way: “The hard reality is there isn't enough funding to protect the toss-up states and also heavily invest in the red-leaning states where we're playing offense.”