Addressing the Political Consultant Industrial Complex

Inside the Democracy Ecosystem

A follow-up to Understanding the Democratic Party, exploring what's broken—and what we're building to fix it

Last month, I wrote about our Democracy and the Democratic Party's structural challenges and how we might strengthen our movement from within. Last week, I shared a post about what the Democratic Party is and isn’t. Today, I want to dive deeper into one of the most critical and opaque parts of our democracy ecosystem: the so-called consultant industrial complex, a term coined by Journalist Bill Moyers, who sadly left us just a few weeks ago.

When billions of dollars flow through our political system each cycle, a staggering portion goes to what some call the "consultant class"—media buyers, digital strategists, pollsters, data analysts, fundraising consultants, and dozens of other specialized roles. In 2024 alone, federal elections cost nearly $16 billion, with consulting services claiming a massive share of those funds.

The industry operates with remarkably little transparency. Even for those who've worked in it for decades, understanding how consultants are selected, what they charge, and what outcomes they deliver remains frustratingly difficult. There is zero accountability.

What the Consultant Industrial Complex Is

The term "consultant industrial complex" might sound like progressive buzzword bingo, but it describes a real phenomenon. Like Eisenhower's warning about the military-industrial complex, we're dealing with an ecosystem where financial incentives don't always align with democratic outcomes.

The scope is massive. We're talking about:

• Traditional media buyers and digital strategists

• Polling and research firms

• Data modeling and analytics companies

• Fundraising consultants and platforms

• Content creators and PR firms

• Field organizing and voter outreach technology

• Campaign management and compliance services

The problems are systemic:

• Relationship-based hiring over merit-based selection

• Hidden markups and undisclosed commissions

• Performance metrics that emphasize spending over outcomes

• Closed networks that exclude diverse talent

• "Scam PACs" that exploit donors while enriching consultants (The grift isn’t just in the MAGA world.)

Take the 2024 Harris campaign: It raised over $1 billion and spent $690 million on paid media alone, with just three consulting firms receiving over $500 million combined. Media Buying and Analytics LLC received over $280 million, Gambit Strategies received $122 million, and Bully Pulpit Interactive took in over $101 million. (see When asked how it could spend that much and still lose, one Biden staffer simply asked, "What the fuck?"

Meanwhile, while thousands of campaign staff had to file for unemployment after the election, dozens of consultants bought second homes and took luxury vacations. The contrast couldn't be starker—or more telling about where the priorities lie in our current system.

(See: The Democratic Consultants Getting Rich off the Harris Campaign)

That's not just a question about one campaign. It's a question about our entire system.

What the Consultant Industrial Complex Isn't

Before we go further, let me be clear about what we're NOT talking about:

We're not anti-consultant. The expertise that consultants bring is valuable and necessary. Consulting firms almost exclusively handle core campaign functions like polling, modeling, and paid advertising, and for good reason—they require specialized knowledge and infrastructure that individual campaigns can't maintain.

We're not trying to eliminate competition. Healthy competition drives innovation and excellence. The problem isn't that consultants compete for business; they don't compete on merit or outcomes too often.

We're not attacking success. We want consultants to succeed—and we want to define success as delivering real impact for progressive causes, not just generating commissions and fees.

We're challenging a system that rewards the status quo over innovation, relationships over results, and opacity over accountability.

Until recently, the only places creating a community for consultants were the AAPC and Campaigns and Elections—and while they serve an important purpose, they are bipartisan, filled with MAGA Republicans, and focused just on consultants. We’re a shared values-based community, and we want the organizations and campaigns that rely on consultants to be part of the solutions.

The Power Imbalance Problem

We need to acknowledge another layer to this: consultants often wield disproportionate influence in our political system, and the structural reasons for this aren't always pretty.

Picture this: we're hiring 20-somethings to manage congressional races with multimillion-dollar budgets. However bright and hardworking, these campaign managers often lack the deep experience that seasoned consultants bring. When you're a first-time campaign manager facing a $3 million budget and a must-win race, of course, you'll defer to the consultant who's run dozens of similar campaigns.

Meanwhile, many decision-makers at party committees and major organizations are eyeing their next career move, and consulting looks appealing. So they're incentivized to maintain good relationships with consultants, hoping to land a job with them after their stint ends. This creates a dynamic where those holding consultants accountable instead look to curry favor with them.

To be clear, this isn't about throwing shade at all consultants—most of the ones I work with have decades of valuable experience that many staff don't have yet, and are ethical. The problem isn't consultant expertise; it's a system that creates unhealthy power dynamics and perverse incentives.

It's not all that different from how lobbyists impact legislation. When experienced professionals with deep relationships and specialized knowledge interact with overworked staff and officials who may be looking toward their next career move, the potential for outsized influence is enormous. As we've seen with the revolving door between Congress and K Street, the consultant ecosystem has its version of this dynamic.

The paradox is that while many consultants wield outsized influence based on their supposed expertise, too many are running antiquated campaigns that aren't up to speed with the current communications landscape. This disconnect between traditional campaign approaches and modern reality is just one of the reasons Trump beat Harris—and why insurgent candidate Zohran Mamdani beat Andrew Cuomo. This isn’t totally new. Ayanna Pressley beat Mike Capuano and AOC beat Joe Crowley in 2018 by understanding how to communicate in today's media environment and not the antiquated approach promoted by too many media consultants and DC institutions.

Those primary victories were so threatening to the establishment that they sparked the DCCC's infamous backlash against consultants working for challengers against incumbents—the loyalty oath forced me out of the firm I was in then. I then wrote about it in The New York Times, and I lost many relationships over it. The party's response wasn't to learn from these successful new approaches, but to try to shut them out entirely. Thankfully this was overturned by new leadership at the DCCC, and to give credit where it is due, they have done better than any committee at changing this terrible culture. Shout out to Tasha Cole for her hard work to change the culture and power dynamics there. ( see paywalled story in the National Journal about this)

Full Disclosure: I've Been Part of This Problem

Before I go any further, let me be completely transparent: I've been a part of this problem too. Long before this incident, I opened a consulting firm after working as a regional director for the DCCC. I was then the Political Director of the DNC and went back to consulting. Did I parlay my relationships into business? Absolutely.

I understand this system from the inside because I've benefited from it. That's precisely why I know it needs to change—and I'm committed to building something better.

The Real-World Impact

The stakes here aren't theoretical. Every dollar wasted on ineffective consulting is not spent advancing our causes. Every talented consultant excluded by closed networks is a missed opportunity for breakthrough strategies. Every donor exploited by deceptive fundraising tactics is a supporter potentially lost forever.

The Washington Post reported that in 2024, political campaigns poured millions into social media influencers with "scant regulatory oversight or public transparency." Online political ad spending topped $1.35 billion, yet the effectiveness of these investments remains largely unevaluated.

Meanwhile, "scam PACs" continue to exploit well-meaning donors. Reuters found that these telemarketers knew they would keep the vast majority of donations they solicited from unwitting supporters. Even the Harris campaign had to warn supporters about "a surge in activity from so-called Scam PACs."

What We're Building: The Political TRUST Initiative

This is where GAIN Power comes in. Just as we've worked to make hiring processes for campaign staff more transparent and equitable, we're now tackling the consultant ecosystem with our Political TRUST Initiative.

TRUST stands for: Transparency • Responsibility • Unity • Standards • Transformation

Here's what we're building:

A Transparent Marketplace

We've created DemocracyDirectory.com, a comprehensive platform connecting organizations with consultants of all sizes and specialties. Consider it a more ethical, transparent alternative to the closed networks dominating consultant selection. It is user-generated and managed and can be searched by women-owned, minority-owned, and more. We’ve had this version up for some time but are working on something more robust and functional. This needs to do much more with ratings and reviews and more flexible content.

Certification

We're developing a comprehensive Consultant Code of Ethics that addresses the industry's most problematic practices:

• Full disclosure of pricing structures and commissions

• Transparent reporting on conflicts of interest

• Performance-based compensation with meaningful accountability

• Commitment to honest fundraising practices

Performance Metrics That Matter

Instead of rewarding consultants for activities and outputs, we're creating frameworks emphasizing outcomes and impact. This means moving beyond "how many ads did we run?" to "what measurable change did we achieve?"

Innovation and Knowledge Sharing

We're building spaces for honest post-campaign analysis, communications innovation labs, and practitioner research partnerships. The goal is to break down the silos that prevent us from learning from both successes and failures.

The Path Forward

This isn't about overnight transformation—it's about building sustainable change. We're starting with:

Phase 1: Community Building

• Drafting ethical standards with diverse stakeholders

• Identifying early adopters willing to pilot new approaches

• Creating communities of practice focused on ethical consulting

Phase 2: Infrastructure Creation

• Launching the technical infrastructure for our consultant marketplace

• Training our certified consultants

• Partnering with progressive/democracy organizations to implement ethical hiring practices

Phase 3: Movement Integration

• Scaling certification programs across the consultant community

• Securing commitments from major donors to prioritize certified consultants

• Creating industry-wide recognition for ethical leadership

Join the Working Group

Here's where you come in. Just last week the GAINiverse Democracy Advisory Committee launched a Consultant & Vendor Marketplace + Accountability working group to tackle these systemic challenges.

We're looking for:

• Consultants ready to lead by example with transparent practices

• Organizations wanting to implement ethical hiring standards

• Donors interested in supporting accountability measures

• Anyone who believes we can build a more effective progressive ecosystem

This isn't about endless meetings—it's about collaboration and action. Join our Slack community, share your expertise, and help us build the infrastructure our movement deserves.

The Bottom Line

The consultant industrial complex isn't going anywhere. But we can transform it from a closed system that perpetuates inequality and inefficiency into an open ecosystem that rewards merit, innovation, and results.

As I wrote after the 2019 Democratic loyalty oath controversy: democracy demands dissent, even from within. Sometimes the most important work happens when we're willing to challenge our systems and structures.

We're building something better. Something more transparent. Something more accountable. Something that serves our values and helps us win.

Want to be part of it?

• Join our Advisory Committee and consultant working group (this sign-up has other groups you may be interested in beyond consultant work).

• Sign the Declaration of Democracy (we’re building a bigger board to organize under).

• Check out DemocracyDirectory.com or add your company/service to it!

• Sign up for our Consultant Newsletter, which will launch soon (and let us know if you want to contribute too).

• Share your thoughts: What would you add to a consultant's code of ethics?

We’re not doing this alone—it is meant to be community-owned, community-driven, and cross-sector. The future of progressive politics isn't just about the candidates we elect or the policies we pass. It's about the infrastructure we build and the values we embed in every part of our movement.

Let's build it together.