think-tank cross-comparison shared-donors both-sides-illusion class-analysis goldman-sachs defense-industry dark-money

related: Heritage Foundation · Brookings Institution · Center for American Progress · Cato Institute · American Enterprise Institute · Third Way · Atlantic Council · Aspen Institute · Center for a New American Security · Hudson Institute · Mercatus Center · Koch Network - Charles Koch · Goldman Sachs · Bradley Foundation


The Argument

Twenty-five think tanks. Conservative, liberal, centrist. They publish competing op-eds, staff opposing administrations, and argue on cable news. The public sees a marketplace of ideas. The donor ledger shows something else: the same money funds the “opposing” shops, and the policy outputs — on the questions that matter most to the donor class — converge.

This analysis maps five donor networks that fund think tanks across the political spectrum, producing the appearance of intellectual competition while delivering compatible outcomes on deregulation, defense spending, financial sector protection, and the structural boundaries of acceptable policy debate.

Money

The think tank ecosystem is not a debate. It is a division of labor. Conservative think tanks produce deregulation and tax cuts. Liberal think tanks produce social programs that leave corporate structures intact. Centrist think tanks manufacture the “bipartisan consensus” that protects the donor class from structural reform. The donors fund all three because all three serve the same function: converting private money into public policy while maintaining the fiction of independent intellectual competition.


I. Goldman Sachs — The Bipartisan Kingmaker

Goldman Sachs is the single most widely distributed think tank funder in this vault, with documented financial or governance ties to institutions across the full political spectrum.

Think TankCategoryGoldman ConnectionDocumented Amount / Role
Brookings InstitutionCentristHamilton Project co-founder (Robert Rubin); Board Chairman (John L. Thornton, $2.5M+)$2.5M+ individual + institutional
Atlantic CouncilCentristBoard Chairman (John F.W. Rogers, Goldman EVP)Board-level governance
Third WayCentristDirect institutional funder$850K (Goldman Sachs Gives, 2010-2011)
Aspen InstituteCentristFormer Board Chair (Robert K. Steel, Goldman partner 20+ years)Board-level governance
Center for American ProgressLiberalDisclosed corporate donor$50K+
American Enterprise InstituteConservativeBoard (Carlyle Group, Goldman-adjacent PE network)Indirect via private equity overlap

Money

Goldman Sachs chairs the board of the Atlantic Council (NATO’s civilian policy shop). Goldman co-founded the Hamilton Project inside Brookings (the Democratic Party’s economic policy factory). Goldman gave $850K to Third Way (Wall Street’s embassy inside the Democratic Party). Goldman’s former partner chaired the Aspen Institute (the billionaire consensus factory). Goldman is a disclosed donor to CAP (the progressive policy factory). The same bank that was the subject of the 2008 financial crisis investigation now governs or funds every major think tank that produced the policy response to that crisis — a response that preserved Goldman’s business model intact.

What Goldman gets: No think tank in this vault — conservative, liberal, or centrist — has produced a major research agenda calling for breaking up Too Big to Fail banks, reinstating Glass-Steagall, or imposing structural financial reform that would threaten Goldman’s operating model. The Hamilton Project at Brookings produced the personnel who ran Obama’s Treasury. Third Way policed the Democratic Party’s left flank against financial reform proposals. The Atlantic Council ensures the dollar-denominated global financial system is defended as “national security.” The policy outputs are different on the surface — one produces “responsible regulation,” another produces “free market principles” — but the structural outcome is identical: Goldman’s world is preserved.


II. Defense Contractors — Funding Both Sides of the Aisle

The defense industry funds think tanks on both sides of the partisan divide, ensuring that regardless of which party holds power, the policy consensus favors increased military spending.

Think TankCategoryPentagon Contractor Funding (2019-2023)Top Defense Donor
Atlantic CouncilCentrist$10.2M (highest of all U.S. think tanks)Northrop Grumman ($5.6M)
Center for a New American SecurityCentrist/Liberal$6.67M (#1 recipient per CIP review)Northrop Grumman
Brookings InstitutionCentrist$3.9MNorthrop Grumman ($1.75M)
Hudson InstituteConservative$2.24MMultiple defense firms
Center for American ProgressLiberalDisclosed donor (undisclosed amount)Northrop Grumman
Aspen InstituteCentrist$1.125MGeneral Dynamics, RTX, McKinsey

Total documented defense contractor spending across 6 think tanks: $24.1M+ (2019-2023)

Money

Northrop Grumman appears as a top funder at every major security think tank in this vault — conservative, liberal, and centrist. The Atlantic Council takes $5.6M from Northrop and has a former Raytheon lobbyist co-chairing its Defense Innovation Commission. CNAS takes $6.67M from defense contractors and then places 30+ alumni in the Biden Pentagon. Brookings takes $1.75M from Northrop and produces defense policy papers. Hudson takes $2.24M and staffs Republican administrations. Even CAP, the “progressive” policy shop, lists Northrop Grumman as a donor. The defense industry doesn’t pick sides because it doesn’t need to. Both sides produce the same output: more spending.

The CNAS / Hudson mirror: CNAS staffs Democratic administrations (30+ Obama-Biden placements). Hudson staffs Republican administrations (Pompeo, Haley, Barr, McMaster, Chao, Gallagher). Both are funded by the same defense contractors. Both produce hawkish national security policy. The partisan labels create the illusion of debate. The defense budget goes up under both.


III. The Koch-Bradley-DonorsTrust Pipeline — Conservative Exclusivity, Bipartisan Outcomes

Unlike Goldman Sachs and the defense industry, the Koch network funds exclusively conservative and libertarian think tanks. But the policy outcomes it purchases cross partisan lines — because the “centrist” think tanks funded by Goldman and defense contractors deliver the same deregulatory outcomes from the other direction.

Think TankCategoryKoch Network FundingDonorsTrustBradley Foundation
Heritage FoundationConservative$5.7M+$500K+$5.9M+ (direct); $50M+ (P2025 network)
Cato InstituteConservative$8.94M+ (Koch-founded)$396K$325K+
American Enterprise InstituteConservative$1.6M-$2M+$86.7M (2003-2010)$480K+
Mercatus CenterConservative$9.85M+ (Koch-founded, Koch on board)$5.5M
Manhattan InstituteConservativeKoch Network memberBradley member
Hudson InstituteConservativeKoch Network member$8.9M$13M+

Total documented Koch/DonorsTrust/Bradley funding to conservative think tanks: $200M+

Money

The Koch-Bradley-DonorsTrust pipeline is the largest documented donor network in the think tank ecosystem, with over $200M in traceable funding to six conservative think tanks alone. DonorsTrust — the “dark money ATM of the conservative movement” — is the anonymization layer: a donor gives to DonorsTrust, DonorsTrust gives to AEI ($86.7M), and the original donor’s identity disappears. The $86.7M from DonorsTrust to AEI alone exceeds the total annual budget of most think tanks in this vault.

Why exclusive conservative funding achieves bipartisan outcomes: Koch-funded think tanks produce the deregulatory research. Goldman-funded “centrist” think tanks produce the “bipartisan consensus” that adopts the same conclusions in softer language. Third Way uses Goldman money to police the Democratic Party against progressive regulation. Brookings’ Hamilton Project produces personnel who run the Treasury and preserve Wall Street’s operating model. The Koch network doesn’t need to fund Democratic think tanks because Goldman-funded Democratic think tanks already deliver compatible outcomes on financial regulation, defense spending, and corporate taxation. The division of labor is structural: Koch funds the offensive (deregulation advocacy); Goldman funds the defense (progressive policy containment).


IV. Foreign Government Funding — The Sovereignty Question

Three think tanks in this vault receive massive foreign government funding, raising questions about who is writing the foreign policy analysis that shapes American strategy.

Think TankCategoryForeign Gov’t FundingLargest Foreign Funder
Atlantic CouncilCentrist$21M (2019-2023, highest of all)UAE ($1M+/year for 5+ years)
Brookings InstitutionCentrist$18.5MQatar ($14.8M, 2011-2013)
Hudson InstituteConservative$2.6M (2023 alone)Taiwan ($2.6M via TECRO)
CNASCentrist$2.81M (2019-2023)Japan, South Korea, Germany, EU
Aspen InstituteCentrist$8M+ (2014-2018)Including Saudi Arabia, UAE

Total documented foreign government funding: $52.9M+

The Atlantic Council’s former Brookings president (Gen. John Allen) was investigated by the FBI for allegedly lobbying the Trump White House on behalf of Qatar — the same government that gave Brookings $14.8M. Taiwan gave Hudson $2.6M in a single year while Hudson fellows advocated for stronger U.S. defense commitments to Taiwan. The UAE gave the Atlantic Council $1M+ annually while the Council’s CEO published favorable op-eds about the UAE.

Contradiction

These think tanks produce the “independent analysis” that shapes American foreign policy debate. The analysis on the Middle East is funded by Middle Eastern governments. The analysis on Taiwan defense is funded by the Taiwanese government. The analysis on NATO expansion is funded by NATO member governments. The independence is the brand. The funding is the reality.


V. The Mega-Foundation Network — Gates, Ford, Soros, and the Liberal Infrastructure

On the liberal side, a handful of major foundations fund the progressive think tank ecosystem — creating a parallel donor-dependency structure that shapes the boundaries of “progressive” policy.

Think TankCategoryGates FoundationFord FoundationSoros/Open Society
Urban InstituteLiberalMajor donorMajor donor
Aspen InstituteCentristMajor donor ($500K+ Breakthrough)Major donor
Brookings InstitutionCentrist$1-2M
Center on Budget and Policy PrioritiesLiberalMajor donorMajor donor (founding)Major donor
Brennan Center for JusticeLiberal$7.47M
Center for American ProgressLiberalMajor donor$3M (founding pledge)
Economic Policy InstituteLiberalAnomalous donor

The foundation network funds think tanks that produce genuine policy wins on social issues — voting rights (Brennan Center), safety net programs (CBPP), wage standards (EPI). But on structural economic questions — financial regulation, healthcare privatization, corporate power — the foundation-funded think tanks operate within boundaries set by their funders. The Gates Foundation funds the Aspen Institute’s climate programs that promote nuclear and carbon capture (technologies Gates invests in). Ford Foundation funds institutions that advocate reform within capitalism, not alternatives to it.


VI. The Convergence Map — Where “Opposing” Think Tanks Agree

The most revealing analysis is not where think tanks disagree (social issues, cultural questions, partisan positioning) but where they converge — because convergence on donor-class priorities reveals the structural function of the entire ecosystem.

Policy Area 1: No Structural Financial Reform

Think TankPositionFunder Alignment
Heritage / Cato / AEIDeregulate financial marketsKoch network, Wall Street boards
Brookings (Hamilton Project)“Responsible regulation” preserving Wall StreetGoldman Sachs co-founded
Third WayBlock progressive financial reform proposalsGoldman $850K, 20/29 finance trustees
CAPNo Glass-Steagall agendaGoldman $50K+, Citigroup $100K+

Outcome: No major think tank in this vault — left, right, or center — produced a serious research agenda for breaking up Too Big to Fail banks. Goldman’s world is preserved regardless of which party governs.

Policy Area 2: Defense Spending Always Increases

Think TankPositionFunder Alignment
Heritage / AEI / HudsonIncrease military spendingDefense contractors, neocon foundations
Atlantic Council / CNASIncrease military spending$10.2M / $6.67M Pentagon contractors
Brookings”Responsible” defense reform (never cuts)$3.9M Pentagon contractors
CAPLiberal interventionism (no budget cuts)Northrop Grumman donor

Outcome: Regardless of which party holds power, the think tanks that staff the Pentagon produce compatible recommendations. The defense budget has increased under every administration since these think tanks were founded.

Policy Area 3: Healthcare — Private Insurance Preserved

Think TankPositionFunder Alignment
Heritage / AEI / CatoMarket-based healthcare, privatize MedicareKoch, pharma donors
CAPACA framework preserving private insuranceAHIP, PhRMA donors
Third WayBlock Medicare for AllPhRMA funding documented
Brookings”Bipartisan” healthcare reform within marketCorporate healthcare donors

Outcome: The ACA preserved private insurance. Medicare for All never received a floor vote. The think tanks that staffed both the Obama and Biden administrations produced healthcare policy that kept the private insurance market intact — serving the donors who funded both the “pro-reform” and “anti-reform” shops.


VII. The Budget Map — Who Has the Most Resources

Total annual revenue across all 25 profiled think tanks, ordered by budget:

Think TankAnnual RevenueCategory
Aspen Institute$443.8MCentrist
Urban Institute$130M+Liberal
Brookings Institution$109MCentrist
Heritage Foundation$100.9MConservative
Atlantic Council$69.9MCentrist
Cato Institute$62.8MConservative
AEI$67.9MConservative
Brennan Center for Justice$57.9MLiberal
CBPP$52.5MLiberal
Mercatus Center$39.3MConservative
Bipartisan Policy Center$37.8MCentrist
CAP$37MLiberal
Third Way$31.7MCentrist
Manhattan Institute$26.9MConservative
Roosevelt Institute$22.8MLiberal
Hudson Institute$22.7MConservative
CNAS$14.1MCentrist
Claremont Institute$13.2MConservative
EPI$11.9MLiberal
New America$37.2MLiberal
Hoover Institution~$100M+ (Stanford)Conservative
Heartland Institute$3.35MConservative

Centrist think tanks — funded primarily by Wall Street, defense contractors, and foreign governments — control the largest combined budget pool. The institutions that manufacture “bipartisan consensus” have more resources than the institutions on either flank.


Class Analysis

The think tank ecosystem functions as a division of labor for the donor class:

Conservative think tanks (Heritage, Cato, AEI, Mercatus, Manhattan Institute) produce the offensive: deregulation, tax cuts, privatization, anti-union policy, climate denial. Funded by Koch, Bradley, DonorsTrust, Scaife — the industrial donor class that benefits directly from weakened regulation.

Liberal think tanks (CAP, EPI, CBPP, Brennan Center, Roosevelt Institute) produce the defense: social programs, voting rights, wage standards, safety net protection — genuine gains that stop short of structural economic reform. Funded by foundations (Gates, Ford, Soros) and corporate donors (Goldman, Citigroup, Google, Northrop Grumman) whose interests are served by reform-within-capitalism, not reform-of-capitalism.

Centrist think tanks (Brookings, Atlantic Council, Aspen, Third Way, CNAS, BPC) manufacture the consensus: “bipartisan” frameworks that set the boundaries of acceptable policy debate. Funded by Wall Street, defense contractors, and foreign governments — the same donor base that funds both flanks.

The three categories are not in competition. They are performing complementary functions for the same donor class. The conservative shops produce the deregulatory policy. The liberal shops produce the social programs that make the deregulatory policy politically sustainable. The centrist shops produce the “bipartisan consensus” that protects the structural arrangements both flanks were designed to preserve.

The donors who fund “opposing” think tanks are not confused or wasteful. They are diversifying their political portfolio — ensuring that regardless of which party governs, the policy outputs on the questions that matter most (financial regulation, defense spending, healthcare markets, corporate taxation) remain within boundaries set by the people writing the checks.

Money

The total documented funding flowing to all 25 think tanks in this vault exceeds $1.5 billion annually. The donors — Goldman Sachs, Koch Industries, Northrop Grumman, DonorsTrust, Bradley Foundation, foreign governments — are not funding a debate. They are funding an ecosystem. The ecosystem’s output is predictable: financial regulation that preserves Wall Street, defense budgets that enrich contractors, healthcare policy that protects insurers, tax policy that rewards the donor class, and a permanent apparatus of “independent experts” who make all of it look like the inevitable product of rational analysis. The ideas are not neutral. They are purchased. This map shows the purchase orders.


Sources


content-readiness:: ready