Why Reboot? What We Hope to Accomplish
Most political organizations exist to win. We exist to fix something specific, and then get out of the way.
Reboot 2028 PAC started from a simple observation: most Americans aren't nearly as far apart as our politics makes it seem. Republicans who feel their party stopped representing them. Democrats tired of their own party's inertia. Independents who've given up on both. People who showed up to "No Kings" rallies because they're worried about unchecked power, not because they signed up for a party platform. Democratic Socialists whose actual policy asks — protecting Social Security, expanding basic healthcare access, taxing extreme wealth concentration — are a lot closer to mainstream common sense than the label suggests. We built this for all of them, with one condition: you have to be reasonable, and you have to be willing to find consensus with people you disagree with.
What "reboot" actually means
We're not trying to fix everything. That's the job of elected officials, courts, and voters over the long run. Our job is narrower: fix the foundational rot — the stuff that makes it hard for anyone, of any party, to govern honestly and be held accountable — so the country has solid ground to build its future on.
Concretely, that means campaign finance transparency, election integrity, congressional term limits, and ending the special exemptions members of Congress carve out for themselves. It means holding officials to the same rules, the same health disclosure standards, and the same systems as the people they represent. It does not mean picking a side in every cultural fight in America. See our Agenda for the specific, real legislative vehicles we're pushing.
The rot we're talking about, by name
We'd rather name specifics than speak in generalities. These are the ones we think are blatant enough that reasonable people across the spectrum should be able to agree they're a problem, regardless of who's in office:
Threats to how elections themselves work. The SAVE Act (H.R. 22) passed the House in February 2026 and would require in-person documentary proof of citizenship — a passport or certified birth certificate, since standard driver's licenses don't qualify — just to register to vote, effectively ending most mail and online registration. Anyone who needs to re-register after moving, or after a legal name change, would have to produce that documentation again. Whatever you think the right balance is between security and access, a rule that makes voting harder specifically for people who've changed their name is a foundational problem, not a partisan talking point.
Billionaires who can buy a campaign outright. This is the direct, practical result of Citizens United and the court cases that followed it: unlimited spending by a single wealthy individual is now just how the system works. We're a Super PAC ourselves, which means we benefit from the same rules we think should change. That's not a contradiction we're going to pretend doesn't exist.
Self-dealing. Members of Congress can trade individual stocks while sitting on committees that directly affect those companies, and they carry separate health insurance and retirement arrangements from the people who elected them. Whatever the original justification, it reads to most Americans as a rules-for-thee-not-for-me arrangement — see our Agenda for exactly what we'd change.
The deficit. The federal deficit is projected at roughly $1.9–2.1 trillion for fiscal year 2026 alone, and the national debt passed $31.5 trillion as of May 2026 — debt held by the public is around 101% of GDP today and is projected to hit 120% by 2036. Neither party has a credible plan to change that trajectory, and both have added to it.
Social Security's math. The 2026 Trustees Report puts the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund on track to be depleted in the fourth quarter of 2032, after which the program can pay about 78% of scheduled benefits. The combined Social Security trust funds run out in 2034, at which point about 83% of benefits would still be payable — not zero, but a real cut for people who paid in their whole working lives, on the current do-nothing path.
The irony we're aware of
We're a Super PAC — a type of political committee that only exists because of the Citizens United and SpeechNow.org court decisions. One of our core planks is supporting a path back to overturning Citizens United. If we ever actually succeed, Super PACs like ours would be eliminated as a legal vehicle. We're fine with that. We'd rather win and work ourselves out of a job than keep the current system exactly as it is, just with us holding the checkbook.
What winning looks like
Not a permanent movement. Not a new party. Success looks like: real legislative progress on the items in our Agenda, candidates who cross party lines to get there, and eventually, a country where a PAC organized around "restore basic accountability" isn't necessary anymore because it's just how the system works. Until then, we'll keep building the coalition, publishing where the money and the accountability gaps are, and backing candidates — of any party — who actually deliver.
If any of this describes you, sign the petition on the homepage. This is your personal Super PAC too.