Third Way, the centrist group that is launching a $15 million campaign to fight the left wing of the Democratic Party, is being funded by health care industry interests that have long opposed one of the left’s primary goals: Medicare for All.
The group—which does not disclose its funders publicly, leaving only glimpses into its corporate benefactors—recently told the New York Times that it will spend to combat the influence of democratic socialists in Democratic Party, in response to a wave of primary election wins by progressives. Jonathan Cowan, the group’s president, said Third Way is “preparing for war” against candidates like those who support Medicare for All.
Third Way announced its plans on the heels of Dr. Abdul El-Sayed’s win last week in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary after he advocated for Medicare for All, a main campaign plank, for nearly a decade. The group says it plans to target El-Sayed as part of its efforts, accusing him of “flirting with democratic socialists.”
One newly-surfaced donor to Third Way is the industry group Better Solutions for Healthcare (BSFH), composed of health insurance lobbying giant AHIP, BlueCross BlueShield, and other insurance trade groups. The group BSFH made its first donation of $50,000 to Third Way’s advocacy arm in 2024, according to its most recent tax filing, its only disclosed donation made that year.
BSFH is run out of the offices of leading Republican digital and strategy firm Targeted Victory in Arlington, according to tax records. The group was formed by Republican operative Alexander Schriver, Targeted Victory’s head of public affairs and BSFH’s past executive director, and has paid millions of dollars to the GOP firm for advertising in recent years. In 2023, Schriver headed out to become senior vice president of public affairs at the lobbying behemoth PhRMA, which co-founded an industry campaign to spike Medicare for All. BSFH is currently led by Targeted Victory’s president, Connie Partoyan, also a former Republican staffer.
In July 2024, Third Way led a coalition letter supporting one of BSFH’s top priorities in Congress, legislation to expand site-neutral payment policies at clinics. Third Way has long opposed proposals for Medicare for All, and earlier this year unveiled its plans to push Democratic presidential candidates away from a single-payer system and instead embrace its package of centrist health policies—mentioning site-neutral payment policies as part of its policy agenda.
Other major health insurance companies, Big Pharma firms, and insurance industry lobbying groups continue donating to Third Way, according to a Sludge review of their disclosures.
Facts Only
* Third Way is a centrist group launching a $15 million campaign.
* The group's stated goal is to combat the influence of democratic socialists in the Democratic Party.
* Third Way does not publicly disclose its funders.
* Better Solutions for Healthcare (BSFH) donated $50,000 to Third Way’s advocacy arm in 2024.
* BSFH consists of AHIP, BlueCross BlueShield, and other insurance trade groups.
* BSFH is operated out of Targeted Victory, a Republican digital and strategy firm in Arlington.
* Alexander Schriver, a former Republican operative and former BSFH executive director, is currently senior vice president of public affairs at PhRMA.
* Connie Partoyan, a former Republican staffer and president of Targeted Victory, currently leads BSFH.
* Third Way led a coalition letter in July 2024 supporting BSFH's priority regarding site-neutral payment policies at clinics.
* Third Way opposes Medicare for All and a single-payer system.
* Dr. Abdul El-Sayed recently won Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary.
* Third Way plans to target El-Sayed for his support of Medicare for All.
Executive Summary
Third Way, a centrist organization, has initiated a $15 million campaign to limit the influence of progressives and democratic socialists within the Democratic Party. This effort follows recent primary victories by candidates like Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, who advocates for Medicare for All. Third Way specifically seeks to steer Democratic presidential candidates away from single-payer systems in favor of centrist health policies, including site-neutral payment policies.
The organization receives funding from health care industry interests, including Big Pharma and insurance lobbying groups. Specifically, Better Solutions for Healthcare (BSFH)—a coalition including AHIP and BlueCross BlueShield—has provided financial support. BSFH is managed by Targeted Victory, a Republican strategy firm, and has been led by figures with ties to both the GOP and PhRMA. While Third Way maintains a centrist political identity, its financial and strategic ties to Republican-led firms and industry groups that oppose single-payer healthcare create a complex intersection of corporate interest and party politics.
Full Take
The strongest version of this narrative is that a centrist political group is acting as a strategic conduit for corporate healthcare interests to protect their business models from systemic legislative threats like Medicare for All. By framing the conflict as a battle for the "soul" or "direction" of the Democratic Party, the financial motivations of the donors are translated into a political struggle over ideology.
The pattern here is the use of a "political front" to mask corporate lobbying. By routing influence through a centrist group (Third Way) and a secondary industry group (BSFH) managed by a GOP firm (Targeted Victory), the actual beneficiaries—insurance giants and pharmaceutical companies—maintain a degree of separation from the aggressive "war" being waged against progressive candidates. This creates a layer of plausible deniability, where the conflict is presented as internal party friction rather than external corporate interference.
Patterns detected: none
The root cause is the tension between the profit motives of the private healthcare industry and the socialized medicine models proposed by the left wing of the Democratic Party. This echoes a historical pattern where corporate interests fund "moderate" factions within opposing parties to ensure that no matter who wins, the fundamental economic structure of the industry remains untouched. The implication is a potential erosion of candidate agency, where the viability of a politician depends less on constituent demand and more on the ability of "dark money" networks to define their "electability."
Who benefits from this arrangement? The insurance and pharmaceutical sectors. Who bears the cost? Candidates whose policy platforms are targeted and voters whose policy preferences may be sidelined by funded opposition.
Bridge Questions:
1. How would the narrative change if the funding sources were fully disclosed in real-time?
2. Does the centrist position of Third Way genuinely reflect a distinct ideological philosophy, or is it a strategic alignment dictated by its donor base?
3. To what extent does the involvement of a Republican firm (Targeted Victory) in a Democratic Party struggle indicate a cross-partisan corporate alliance?
Counterstrike Scan: A coordinated influence campaign would likely amplify the "Republican operative" angle to paint the centrist group as a "Trojan horse" for the GOP to sabotage the Democratic Party from within. While the facts regarding Targeted Victory are present, the text remains focused on the financial link to healthcare interests rather than pushing a "sabotage" conspiracy. The content is clean.