By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Elizabeth Simons, daughter of the late billionaire hedge fund investor Jamie Simons, has donated $250,000 to the pro-Zohran Mamdani super PAC, New Yorkers for Lower Costs, making it the largest contribution to the group. The super PAC has already raised nearly $2 million from almost 300 donations. Simons, who is chairwoman of the Heising-Simons Foundation, is contributing to a campaign of a Democratic socialist, Mamdani, who has expressed that he does not believe billionaires should exist. Other super PACs have also been supporting campaigns of mayoral candidates, including Andrew Cuomo and Eric Adams.
Read the original article here
Elizabeth Simons, heir to a hedge fund fortune, recently made a substantial donation of $250,000 to a Super PAC supporting Zohran Mamdani. This single act brings forward a cascade of thoughts.
The fact that a wealthy individual is willing to contribute to a political cause, in itself, isn’t newsworthy. However, the context matters. In this instance, the donation comes from a billionaire heiress, directed towards a Super PAC that supports a candidate who has garnered attention for his progressive stance. There is a lot of debate on whether it is a good thing or a bad thing that wealthy individuals contribute to political causes. Some see it as a positive, believing that it helps causes, and brings about change.
Perspective is key. Let’s consider the scale. If we estimate Simons’ wealth conservatively, perhaps at a billion dollars, this donation represents a tiny fraction, just 0.025% of her wealth. To put that in relatable terms, it’s equivalent to someone making $100,000 a year donating a mere $25.
The size of the donation, compared to her overall wealth, opens up discussion. However, it can also be seen as a strategic move. By making this contribution, Simons is potentially trying to get ahead of any criticism that Mamdani might receive from those who don’t like him.
It seems that some people are willing to pay higher taxes to live in places that are safe and have a better quality of life. We have seen it with the millionaire’s tax in Massachusetts.
A common sentiment, is that billionaires shouldn’t exist. However, with this donation to a left-wing candidate it does allow the possibility of hope that a candidate will actually do what is right. The donation is essentially a political play, where someone wants to have more power over a candidate. This allows the donor to bring their own agenda into the mix.
It is likely that some see this donation as a negative thing, since it brings the question of influence and money into the spotlight. Also, the fact that she’s donating to a Super PAC, rather than directly to Mamdani’s campaign, adds another layer. Super PACs can spend unlimited amounts of money to support or oppose candidates, but they are not allowed to coordinate directly with the candidates themselves. This allows donors to get away with some things.
There is the question if this is a significant event. The contribution alone is not necessarily noteworthy. It does, however, set up a narrative: perhaps painting Mamdani as another candidate supported by wealth. Regardless, the fact remains that in American politics, significant campaign success often requires the backing of financial resources.
It is important to understand that the acquisition of this wealth comes at the expense of the working class. Some people believe that the Simons are sincere in their desire to help people. This donation by Elizabeth Simons will likely be viewed from many angles, depending on your viewpoint, and political alignment.