think-tank liberal tech-policy google silicon-valley national-security education obama-pipeline class-analysis
related: Goldman Sachs
Who They Are
New America (formerly the New America Foundation) is a center-left think tank headquartered at 740 15th Street NW, Washington, D.C., with a second office in Oakland, California. Founded in 1999 by Ted Halstead, Sherle Schwenninger, Michael Lind, and Walter Russell Mead, the organization originally marketed itself as a “radical center” that would transcend left-right politics. In practice, it has become the most prominent example of Silicon Valley policy laundering in Washington — a think tank whose research agendas are shaped by tech industry money, and whose most revealing moment came when it fired a scholar for criticizing its largest donor.
New America’s institutional function is to translate Silicon Valley’s policy preferences into the language of progressive governance — framing tech industry interests as innovation, education reform, and digital equity rather than corporate deregulation. The 2017 firing of Barry Lynn, who headed New America’s Open Markets program and criticized Google’s monopoly power, is the defining incident: it demonstrated in real time how donor money constrains the boundaries of “independent” research.
Budget: $37.2 million total revenue (FY2024), $41.3 million in expenses, $52.3 million in net assets, $81.4 million in total assets. Revenue composition: 91% contributions ($33.8M), 3.6% program services ($1.3M), 5% investment income ($1.9M). The organization ran a $4.1M deficit in FY2024. Revenue has grown from $2.9M (2001) to $37.2M (2024) — a 13x increase in 23 years, with a dramatic inflection from $20M (2014) to $48M (2020) that coincides with the peak of tech industry philanthropic spending.
Tax status: 501(c)(3). Tax-exempt since July 1998. EIN: 52-2096845.
CEO: Anne-Marie Slaughter (since 2013). Compensation: $570,709 + $39,151 other (FY2024). Slaughter previously served as Director of Policy Planning at the State Department under Hillary Clinton (2009–2011) and was Dean of Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School (2002–2009). Her prominence as a public intellectual — particularly her 2012 Atlantic article “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” — gives New America media visibility disproportionate to its policy output.
Key staff:
- Paul Butler (President & CTO, $438,951 + $49,146)
- Barry Howard (COO, $301,435 + $65,728)
- Cecilia Munoz (VP for Public Interest Technology) — former Obama White House Director of Domestic Policy Council (8 years on senior staff)
- Peter Bergen (VP for Global Studies) — CNN national security analyst, author, documentary filmmaker
Board Chair: Sally R. Osberg
Board of Directors (notable members per InfluenceWatch):
- David Bradley — chairman of Atlantic Media
- David Brooks — New York Times columnist
- James Fallows — national correspondent for The Atlantic
- Fareed Zakaria — CNN host
Former board member: Eric Schmidt — former CEO of Google/Alphabet. Schmidt’s presence on the board while Google donated $21M+ to New America is the central conflict-of-interest story.
Founder: Ted Halstead (1999–2007 as president). Died September 2, 2020 at age 52 in a hiking accident.
Staff size: Approximately 200+. Large for a think tank, reflecting New America’s broad programmatic scope.
2026 development: The Department of Defense under Secretary Pete Hegseth announced it would limit institutional ties with New America, barring U.S. service members from attending certain graduate-level programs and fellowships at the organization.
Who Funds Them
New America’s funding reveals the Silicon Valley-to-policy pipeline in its purest form. Between 1999 and 2018, New America received $170 million in foundation grants. The dominant funders are tech industry foundations, progressive mega-foundations, and Wall Street philanthropy.
Google / Eric Schmidt — The defining funder. Google and the Eric Schmidt Family Foundation contributed $21 million+ to New America over the years. Schmidt served on New America’s board of directors, and the organization’s main conference room was named the “Eric Schmidt Ideas Lab.” This funding relationship became the center of a national controversy in 2017 when New America fired Barry Lynn after he praised the EU’s $2.7 billion antitrust fine against Google.
Major foundation funders (per InfluenceWatch donor data):
- Schwab Charitable Fund — $5.01M (2017 alone)
- Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation — Multiple grants totaling millions ($2.4M + $1.2M + $800K in 2017 alone)
- Ford Foundation — Multiple grants ($2M + $1.16M + $800K + $587K in 2017)
- Foundation to Promote Open Society (Soros) — Multiple grants ($250K + $120K + $115K + $100K + $100K in 2018 alone)
- Rockefeller Foundation — $475K (2017), plus $1M+ historical (funded Steve Coll’s anti-ExxonMobil book while at New America)
- Aphorism Foundation — $2M (2017)
- Silicon Valley Community Foundation — $527K (2017)
- Tides Foundation — $500K (2018)
- Democracy Fund — $225K (2018)
Wall Street donors:
- Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund — $750K (2018)
- JPMorgan Chase Foundation — $1.275M (2018, across three grants)
Government contracts:
- U.S. Department of State — $1.4M+ (FY2018–2019) for wireless network development for dissidents in Iran, Syria, Libya, and Cuba. This raised concerns among alumni about independence from government.
Corporate donors per public disclosures:
New America publishes an annual donor list. The 2018 list includes tech companies, financial institutions, and progressive foundations as the dominant categories.
Money
The Google funding story is the Rosetta Stone of think tank corruption — not because $21M is the largest donation in the think tank world (it’s not), but because the firing of Barry Lynn made the mechanism visible. When Lynn praised the EU’s antitrust fine against Google, Slaughter emailed him: “just THINK about how you are imperilling funding for others.” That email is the most honest sentence ever written about think tank governance. Research is free — as long as it doesn’t threaten the money. Google’s $21M didn’t buy specific policy papers; it bought a boundary. New America could research anything it wanted, as long as it didn’t research Google’s monopoly power. The “Eric Schmidt Ideas Lab” conference room wasn’t named ironically — it was a literal description of whose ideas the lab would produce.
What They Produce
New America operates across a broad range of policy areas, reflecting its large budget and staff:
1. Open Technology Institute (OTI) — Digital rights, internet freedom, surveillance policy, net neutrality. This is New America’s most substantive tech policy program — and the one most constrained by the Google funding relationship, since net neutrality and platform regulation directly affect Google’s business interests.
2. Education Policy — K-12 education reform, early childhood education, higher education access. Funded by Gates Foundation. New America’s education work promotes data-driven accountability frameworks that align with Gates’s education reform agenda.
3. Political Reform — Electoral reform, voting access, democratic governance. Overlaps with the Democracy Fund and Soros-funded initiatives.
4. National Security / International Programs — Peter Bergen’s security analysis, future of war studies, international security programs. New America’s national security work is its most genuinely independent program — less constrained by donor interests because national security funders have different incentive structures than tech companies.
5. Public Interest Technology — Cecilia Munoz’s program connecting technology and government service. A newer initiative that frames tech industry skills as public goods.
6. Future of Property Rights / Economic Mobility — Asset building, economic security research.
7. New America California — State-level policy research focused on California.
8. Open Markets Program (former) — Barry Lynn’s anti-monopoly program, which was expelled from New America in 2017 after criticizing Google. Open Markets reconstituted as the independent Open Markets Institute, where it continues the anti-monopoly work that New America’s donors wouldn’t permit.
The Policy Pipeline
New America’s pipeline operates through three channels: Obama administration personnel placement, tech industry policy framing, and media amplification through its board-level media connections.
How New America research becomes policy:
- Tech industry and foundations fund research programs — Google funds tech policy, Gates funds education, Soros funds governance reform
- Research framed as “innovation” or “digital equity” — Tech industry preferences packaged as progressive policy
- Obama administration revolving door — Slaughter (State), Munoz (DPC), Mariani (Education) alumni provide government connections
- Media amplification — Board members at Atlantic Media, NYT, CNN ensure New America research reaches elite media audiences
- State Department contracts — Direct government funding for dissent technology programs
Donation-to-Policy Timeline
| Date | Recipient/Target | Amount | Policy Return | Time Gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1999 | Ted Halstead / founders | Founding investment | New America Foundation created as “radical center” think tank | Foundation |
| 2007–2017 | Google/Schmidt → New America | $21M+ cumulative | Tech-friendly policy research, “Eric Schmidt Ideas Lab,” implicit constraint on anti-Google research | Ongoing |
| 2009 | U.S. State Department → New America | Contract (undisclosed) | Wireless networks for dissidents in Iran, Syria, Libya, Cuba — raised independence concerns among alumni | Direct government contract |
| 2013 | Slaughter → New America CEO | N/A (personnel) | Former State Department Policy Planning director becomes CEO — Obama admin revolving door | Government → think tank |
| 2015–2018 | Gates Foundation → New America | Millions (multiple grants) | Education reform research aligned with Gates’s data-driven accountability agenda | Immediate |
| Jun 2017 | EU → Google (antitrust fine) | $2.7B fine | Barry Lynn praises EU action — triggers internal crisis | Catalyst |
| Aug 2017 | New America → Barry Lynn | Fired | Lynn expelled for criticizing Google; Open Markets program evicted; Slaughter emails reveal donor pressure mechanism | Immediate |
| 2017 | Ford Foundation → New America | $4.55M (2017 grants) | Progressive policy research across multiple programs | Immediate |
| 2018 | Goldman Sachs + JPMorgan → New America | $2.025M combined | Wall Street philanthropy funds “centrist” policy research | Immediate |
| 2020 | All donors → New America | $48.3M (peak year) | Largest revenue year — coincides with pandemic/election policy window | Immediate |
| Feb 2026 | DOD / Hegseth | Policy change | Pentagon limits institutional ties with New America, bars military fellowships | External political action |
Money
The 2017 Barry Lynn firing created a natural experiment in think tank governance. Before the firing, New America housed both pro-Google research (through its tech programs) and anti-monopoly research (through Open Markets). The two could coexist as long as Open Markets didn’t directly challenge Google. The moment Lynn crossed that line — praising the EU fine — the institutional immune system activated. Slaughter’s email to Lynn (“just THINK about how you are imperilling funding for others”) revealed the mechanism: donor money doesn’t need to explicitly dictate research conclusions. It just needs to exist at a scale where losing it threatens the institution’s survival. Self-censorship does the rest. The $21M from Google didn’t buy positive research about Google — it bought the absence of negative research about Google.
The Revolving Door
New America’s revolving door runs primarily through the Obama administration and elite media.
| Name | Government/External Role | New America Role | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anne-Marie Slaughter | State Dept. Policy Planning Director (Obama), Princeton Dean | CEO (2013–present) | Government → think tank |
| Cecilia Munoz | Obama White House DPC Director (8 years), UnidosUS SVP | VP for Public Interest Technology | Government → think tank |
| Tyra A. Mariani | Chief of Staff, Dept. of Education (Obama) | President and COO | Government → think tank |
| Eric Schmidt | Google/Alphabet CEO/Chairman | Board of Directors (former) | Tech industry → think tank |
| Steve Coll | Washington Post managing editor, Columbia J-School Dean | CEO (2007–2012) | Media → think tank → academia |
| David Bradley | Atlantic Media chairman | Board of Directors | Media → think tank governance |
| David Brooks | New York Times columnist | Board of Directors | Media → think tank governance |
| Fareed Zakaria | CNN host | Board of Directors | Media → think tank governance |
| Barry Lynn | New America Open Markets director | Fired (2017) → founded Open Markets Institute | Think tank → independent (expelled) |
| Susan Molinari | Former GOP congresswoman, Google lobbyist | Reportedly spoke to Slaughter during Lynn controversy | Tech lobbying → think tank pressure |
The pattern: New America’s revolving door has three distinct tracks. The Obama administration track (Slaughter, Munoz, Mariani) provides government credibility and Democratic establishment connections. The media track (Coll, Bradley, Brooks, Zakaria) provides elite media amplification — when New America publishes research, board members at the NYT, Atlantic, and CNN ensure it reaches the right audiences. The Silicon Valley track (Schmidt, Google funding) provides the money. The three tracks converge to produce an institution that looks like progressive policy research but functions as a conduit for tech industry influence on Democratic policymaking.
Contradiction
New America markets itself as promoting “ideas and leaders for a better future” — implicitly positioning itself as forward-thinking and independent. But the Barry Lynn episode revealed that “independent” has limits defined by the donor class. The same institution that houses research on digital rights and internet freedom fired the scholar who applied those principles to its largest donor. The board’s media connections (NYT columnist, CNN host, Atlantic chairman) ensure that New America’s version of “independence” is the one that reaches elite audiences, while the expelled version (Open Markets Institute) operates on a fraction of the budget. Independence, at New America, is a product — manufactured by tech money and distributed by media insiders.
What Their Funders Got
Google / Eric Schmidt got:
- A premier Washington think tank with their name on the conference room
- Tech policy research that framed Google’s interests as innovation and digital opportunity
- The absence of anti-monopoly research from the think tank most positioned to produce it (until Barry Lynn was fired)
- Board-level access to an institution with Obama administration connections and elite media board members
- The “Eric Schmidt Ideas Lab” — literal institutional branding
Progressive foundations (Ford, Hewlett, Soros) got:
- A large-scale progressive policy operation covering education, governance, national security, and economic mobility
- Obama administration alumni maintaining the policy infrastructure between Democratic presidencies
- Media amplification through board-level connections to NYT, Atlantic, CNN
Gates Foundation got:
- Education reform research aligned with data-driven accountability frameworks
- Progressive institutional cover for education policies that teachers’ unions often oppose
- Access to Democratic policymakers through New America’s revolving door
Goldman Sachs / JPMorgan got:
- $2M+ bought association with a progressive think tank — “bipartisan” credibility for Wall Street philanthropy
- Policy research framed as economic mobility and innovation rather than financial regulation
The Obama administration network got:
- An institutional home for former officials (Slaughter, Munoz, Mariani) maintaining policy influence between administrations
- Media connections ensuring continued public visibility for Obama-era policy frameworks
- A platform for translating Obama-era governance philosophy into ongoing policy advocacy
Class Analysis
New America is the most important case study in the vault of how Silicon Valley captures progressive institutions. The Google-Lynn affair made visible a dynamic that operates invisibly across the entire think tank ecosystem: donor money doesn’t need to dictate research conclusions — it just needs to define the boundaries of permissible research.
1. Silicon Valley policy laundering. Google’s $21M+ investment in New America bought something more valuable than lobbying: it bought the transformation of Google’s corporate interests into the language of progressive governance. When New America researches “digital equity” or “internet freedom,” the framing inherently favors tech industry interests because the research is funded by tech industry money. The laundering is complete when policy recommendations that benefit Google are published under the New America brand and amplified by board members at the NYT and CNN. By the time the policy reaches a congressional staffer, it looks like independent progressive research rather than what it is: corporate advocacy with a 501(c)(3) wrapper.
2. The self-censorship mechanism. The Barry Lynn firing demonstrated the most efficient form of donor control: not censorship but self-censorship. For years before the 2017 crisis, New America researchers knew (or could intuit) that criticizing Google was institutionally dangerous. The $21M relationship didn’t require explicit instructions — the “Eric Schmidt Ideas Lab” conference room was a daily reminder of whose money paid the bills. Slaughter’s email (“just THINK about how you are imperilling funding for others”) revealed that the mechanism works through institutional solidarity: researchers police each other because everyone’s funding depends on keeping the major donors happy.
3. The media-think tank complex. New America’s board is a map of elite liberal media: the chairman of Atlantic Media, a NYT columnist, a CNN host. This isn’t incidental — it’s the distribution channel. When New America publishes research, it reaches elite media through personal relationships, not press releases. This creates a closed loop: tech money funds research → research is amplified by media board members → amplified research shapes policy → policy outcomes benefit tech funders → tech funders increase donations. The board composition is the pipeline.
4. The expelled truth. Barry Lynn’s Open Markets program was doing the research New America was designed to suppress: documenting how tech monopolies harm competition, consumers, and democracy. When that research threatened Google’s interests, it was expelled — and reconstituted as the independent Open Markets Institute. The irony is that Open Markets’ anti-monopoly work went on to influence the Biden FTC under Lina Khan, achieving more policy impact outside New America than it ever could inside. The think tank’s donor structure made it structurally incapable of producing the research that mattered most.
Money
New America’s $37.2M budget (FY2024) is funded by the same tech industry and Wall Street interests whose power its research ostensibly analyzes. Google alone provided $21M+ — enough to fund the entire think tank for more than half a year. Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan contributed $2M+ in a single year. The progressive foundation money (Ford, Hewlett, Soros, Gates) provides ideological cover, but the structural function is clear: New America exists at the intersection of tech money, Wall Street philanthropy, and Obama administration alumni, producing research that serves all three constituencies while wearing the costume of progressive independence. The “Eric Schmidt Ideas Lab” wasn’t an embarrassing naming accident — it was truth in advertising. The only honest thing about the arrangement was the sign on the door.
Sources
- ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer: New America Foundation (EIN 52-2096845) (Tier 1)
- InfluenceWatch: New America (New America Foundation) (Tier 3)
- Wikipedia: New America (organization) (Tier 3)
- The Intercept: New America Emails Show How Google Wields Power in Washington (2017) (Tier 2)
- Media Bias/Fact Check: New America (Tier 3)
- New America: About Us (Tier 3)
- Washingtonian: Has the New America Foundation Lost Its Way? (2018) (Tier 2)
- Fortune: Google-Funded Think Tank New America Boots Antitrust Crusader (2017) (Tier 2)
- Capital Research Center: Compromised — Google, New America, and the Trouble With Corporate Funding for Think Tanks (Tier 3)
- Fortune: Pentagon chief blocks officers from attending Ivy League schools and other top universities (2026) (Tier 2)
- The Guardian: Forget Wall Street — Silicon Valley is the new political power in Washington (2017) (Tier 2)
- The New Republic: The Credible Think Tank Is Dead — Google, New America, and the corporate capture of policy research (2017) (Tier 2)
- New America: Funding disclosure page — donor list and transparency (Tier 3)
- NPR: Google-Funded Think Tank Fires Scholar Who Criticized Tech Giant (2017) (Tier 2)
- SourceWatch: New America Foundation — funding, board, and policy influence documentation (Tier 3)
content-readiness:: ready