442898
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Trump vows to make Musk head of "government efficiency commission"
URL: U.S. Agencies Fund, and Fight With, Elon Musk. A Trump Presidency Could Give Him Power Over Them.
|
John Hudson, Washington Post: Oct 20 Musk has thrown his fortune and power behind Trump and, in return, Trump has vowed to make Musk head of a new “government efficiency commission” with the power to recommend wide-ranging cuts at federal agencies and changes to federal rules: linked article is currently available NEW YORK TIMES: By Eric LiptonDavid A. FahrentholdAaron Krolik and Kirsten Grind Published Oct. 20, 2024 Updated Oct. 21, 2024 Elon Musk’s influence over the federal government is extraordinary, and extraordinarily lucrative. Mr. Musk’s rocket company, SpaceX, effectively dictates NASA’s rocket launch schedule. The Defense Department relies on him to get most of its satellites to orbit. His companies were promised $3 billion across nearly 100 different contracts last year with 17 federal agencies. FEDERAL CONTRACTS Two of Elon Musk’s companies account for at least $15.4 billion in government contracts over the past decade. CABINET DEPARTMENTS Energy $7,000 State $440,000 At least $352,000 in contracts Commerce $1.9 million Veterans Affairs $463,000 Interior Federal contracts $138,000 Homeland Security $359,000 Agriculture $120,000 Transportation $21,000 Defense $3.6 billion INDEPENDENT AGENCIES General Services Administration At least $15.4 billion in contracts $352,000 Environmental Protection Agency $30,000 NASA $11.8 billion Elon Musk’s Big Business and Conflicts of Interest With the U.S. Government - The New York Times By Jonathan Corum His entanglements with federal regulators are also numerous and adversarial. His companies have been targeted in at least 20 recent investigations or reviews, including over the safety of his Tesla cars and the environmental damage caused by his rockets. INVESTIGATION AND OVERSIGHT Mr. Musk’s companies are increasingly facing regulatory battles and overlapping federal investigations from all corners of the government. CABINET DEPARTMENTS Transportation Investigations Investigations Justice OSHA violations Oversight Labor Lawsuit Enforcement Interior Investigation Agriculture Violations, fines Discrimination suit INDEPENDENT AGENCIES OSHA violations National Labor Relations Board Starbase review Violation Oversight, rejected subsidies Equal Employment Opportunity Comm. Environmental Protection Agency Violations, fines Securities and Exchange Comm. Investigation Federal Communications Comm. Investigations, court order Federal Trade Comm. Oversight, consent decree Elon Musk’s Big Business and Conflicts of Interest With the U.S. Government - The New York Times By Jonathan Corum Given Mr. Musk’s immense business footprint, he will be a major player no matter who wins the election. But he has thrown his fortune and power behind former President Donald J. Trump and, in return, Mr. Trump has vowed to make Mr. Musk head of a new “government efficiency commission” with the power to recommend wide- ranging cuts at federal agencies and changes to federal rules. That would essentially give the world’s richest man and a major government contractor the power to regulate the regulators who hold sway over his companies, amounting to a potentially enormous conflict of interest. Through a review of court filings, regulatory dockets and government contracting data, The New York Times has compiled an accounting of Mr. Musk’s multipronged business arrangements with the federal government, as well as the violations, fines, consent decrees and other inquiries federal agencies have ordered against his companies. Together, they show a deep web of relationships: Instead of entering this new role as a neutral observer, Mr. Musk would be passing judgment on his own customers and regulators. ADVERTISEMENT SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Already, Mr. Musk has discussed how he would use the new position to help his own companies. He has questioned a rule that required SpaceX to obtain a permit for discharging large amounts of potentially polluted water from its launchpad in Texas. He also said that limiting this kind of oversight could help SpaceX reach Mars sooner — “so long as it is not smothered by bureaucracy,” he wrote on X, his social-media platform. “The Department of Government Efficiency is the only path to extending life beyond Earth.” Earlier this month, he attacked the Federal Communications Commission, which oversees the internet satellites that SpaceX launches. He suggested on X that if the commission hadn’t “illegally revoked” more than $886 million worth of federal funding the company had sought to deliver internet access to rural areas, satellite kits would “probably have saved lives in North Carolina” after a hurricane devastated parts of the state. A spokesman for the commission said it didn’t award the money because the company was proposing to provide services in some areas that weren’t actually rural, including the Newark Liberty International Airport. Mr. Musk and SpaceX did not respond to requests for comment for this article. Brian Hughes, a spokesman for Mr. Trump, declined to directly address questions about the potential for a conflict of interest, if Mr. Musk takes on this new role. More in Politics Trump’s Claims That Blame Migrants: False or MisleadingOct. 18, 2024 In Trump Ad, ‘Not a Thing That Comes to Mind’ Ties Harris to Biden’s LiabilitiesOct. 21, 2024 How Maya Rudolph’s Impression of Kamala Harris Has ChangedOct. 19, 2024 “Elon Musk is a genius, an innovator, and has literally made history by building creative, modern and efficient systems,” Mr. Hughes said in a statement. Regardless of who is elected president, the deep ties between Mr. Musk and the U.S. government are unlikely to change anytime soon, with agencies becoming increasingly reliant on the vehicles, rockets, internet and other services his companies provide. What he delivers to the U.S. government is sprawling, according to federal contract data: ROCKETS, CARS AND SATELLITES Some examples of the services that Mr. Musk’s companies provide to the U.S. government. Energy State Commerce Veterans Affairs Interior Homeland Security Agriculture Transportation Defense G.S.A. $2.2 billion E.P.A. NASA Energy State Commerce Veterans Affairs Interior Homeland Security Agriculture $25,000 Transportation Defense G.S.A. E.P.A. NASA Energy State $57,800 Commerce Veterans Affairs Interior Homeland Security Agriculture Transportation Defense G.S.A. E.P.A. NASA Energy State Commerce Veterans Affairs Interior Homeland Security Agriculture $120,000 Transportation Defense G.S.A. E.P.A. NASA The same diagram from above depicts the connections between Mr. Musk’s companies and the many cabinet departments and federal agencies with whom the companies have contracts. SpaceX was hired to design, build and test a space landing system for astronauts. SpaceX sold Starlink satellite internet to the U.S. embassy in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan, providing access to U.S. officials in a country that severely censors online activity. Tesla provided a tactical vehicle to the U.S. embassy in Iceland. And the U.S. Forestry Service used Starlinks to connect emergency responders battling wildfires in remote parts of California. By Jonathan Corum The idea for an efficiency commission originated with Mr. Musk. When he interviewed Mr. Trump on X in August, Mr. Musk brought it up three times — returning to the topic when Mr. Trump digressed into other subjects. “I think it would be great to just have a government efficiency commission that takes a look at these things and just ensures that the taxpayer money — the taxpayers’ hard-earned money — is spent in a good way,” Mr. Musk said the third time. “And I’d be happy to help out on such a commission.” “I’d love it,” Mr. Trump finally replied. “Well, you, you’re the greatest cutter.” Maya MacGuineas, president of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, applauded the idea of an efficiency commission, and said that Mr. Musk’s experience in business could be good preparation to lead it. She said Mr. Musk’s formal power would most likely be limited. Previous presidents, going back to Theodore Roosevelt, have tried using committees of business-minded outsiders to rethink government. For their ideas to become law, Congress has to agree. Usually, she said, it does not. But a suggestion from Mr. Musk could still be damaging to an agency, if he singled it out to Mr. Trump as an example of waste or mismanagement. ADVERTISEMENT SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Legal experts who have studied federal ethics rules and the use of outside business executives as government advisers said Mr. Musk’s interactions with the federal government are so broad it might not be possible for him to serve as a prominent adviser to the president without creating major conflicts of interest. Mr. Musk “has had very contentious interactions and entanglements with regulators,” said Kathleen Clark, an ethics lawyer who has served as an adviser to the District of Columbia Attorney General’s office. “It is entirely reasonable to believe that what he would bring to this federal audit is his own set of biases and grudges and financial interests.” Mr. Musk and his companies often question federal regulations — particularly when they threaten to slow plans to further expand his operations. One such example was the test launch this month of Starship, SpaceX’s newest rocket. NASA has agreed to pay the company as much as $4.4 billion to take astronauts to the surface of the moon on two future missions — although the dates will depend on when all the equipment is ready. So far, Starship has not flown any humans. But the Federal Aviation Administration held up this most recent test launch for weeks, in part because of questions about harm SpaceX has caused to wildlife near its Texas launch site, a delay that infuriated Mr. Musk. “We continue to be stuck in a reality where it takes longer to do the government paperwork to license a rocket launch than it does to design and build the actual hardware,” SpaceX said in a statement. Last month, the F.A.A. started the process to fine SpaceX $633,009 for disregarding license requirements related to two of its Florida launches last year that may have compromised safety, the agency said. This was a shift for the F.A.A., which in past instances had not imposed fines when SpaceX ignored the agency’s direct orders. Marc Nichols, the F.A.A.’s chief counsel, said in a statement last month that “failure of a company to comply with the safety requirements will result in consequences.” Mr. Musk responded on his social media site: “SpaceX will be filing suit against the FAA for regulatory overreach.” The company followed up with a four-page letter to Congress complaining about the F.A.A. which it said had been “unsuccessful in modernizing and streamlining its regulations.” The list of clashes by Mr. Musk’s companies extends to many other federal agencies. FINES AND FIGHTING Several examples of clashes between U.S. agencies and Mr. Musk’s companies. CABINET DEPARTMENTS Transportation Justice Labor Interior Agriculture INDEPENDENT AGENCIES N.L.R.B. E.E.O.C. E.P.A. S.E.C. F.C.C F.T.C. CABINET DEPARTMENTS Transportation Justice Labor Interior Agriculture INDEPENDENT AGENCIES N.L.R.B. E.E.O.C. E.P.A. S.E.C. F.C.C F.T.C. CABINET DEPARTMENTS Transportation Justice Labor Interior Agriculture INDEPENDENT AGENCIES N.L.R.B. E.E.O.C. E.P.A. S.E.C. F.C.C F.T.C. CABINET DEPARTMENTS Transportation Justice Labor Interior Agriculture INDEPENDENT AGENCIES N.L.R.B. E.E.O.C. E.P.A. S.E.C. F.C.C F.T.C. Similar to an earlier diagram, this one again shows connecting lines Mr. Musk’s companies and the cabinet departments and federal agencies that have opened investigations and other reviews of the companies. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has opened five investigations of Tesla, including for complaints of unexpected braking, loss of steering control and crashes while cars were in “self-driving” mode. Tesla has tried to block at least two rulings from the National Labor Relations Board, including one punishing Mr. Musk for tweeting that factory workers would lose stock options if they joined a union. Neuralink, Mr. Musk’s brain-implant company, was fined for violating Transportation Department rules regarding the movement of hazardous materials. The Justice Department sued SpaceX, arguing that the company refused to hire refugees and people granted asylum because of their citizenship status. Elon Musk’s Big Business and Conflicts of Interest With the U.S. Government - The New York Times By Jonathan Corum Mr. Musk in recent years has particularly attacked the Securities and Exchange Commission, which in 2018 charged him with securities fraud for a series of false and misleading tweets related to taking Tesla private. Mr. Musk had posted on Twitter that he had planned to take the company private at $420 a share, and that he had “funding secured” for a transaction. As part of a later settlement with the S.E.C., he stepped down as Tesla’s chairman and Tesla paid a $20 million fine. In a 2022 TED Talk, Mr. Musk lambasted regulators, calling them “bastards.” Even before getting a formal role in the federal government, Mr. Musk has repeatedly called for a broad effort to strike or weaken federal regulations, and to slash federal spending. “If Trump wins, we do have an opportunity to do kind of a once in a lifetime deregulation and reduction in the size of the government,” Mr. Musk said at a conference in Los Angeles last month. If Mr. Musk were to get a senior advisory role in a Trump administration, regulators might have to consider how taking action against one of Mr. Musk’s companies might affect their budget or regulatory authority, even if he did not directly push those agencies to back down, Ms. Clark said. The federal government has rules intended to prevent such conflicts. There are 1,019 advisory committees with more than 60,000 members, opining on everything from how pesticides are used on farms to how wild horses in the United States are managed. But these committees each have very narrow jurisdiction, compared to a governmentwide “efficiency” review that Mr. Musk would lead. Another criminal law prohibits federal employees and outside advisers who are sometimes considered “special government employees” from “participating personally and substantially in any particular matter that affects your financial interests, as well as the financial interests of your spouse, minor child, general partner, an organization in which you serve as an officer.” But that has often not prevented problems with outside advisers — even those with much less complicated portfolios than Mr. Musk’s. Pharmaceutical industry advisers to the Food and Drug Administration, various studies have shown, often appear to have made recommendations that benefit their corporate interests, as have military contractors tapped to advise the Pentagon. ADVERTISEMENT SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Mr. Musk has hinted at one government efficiency he would like to see: killing NASA’s Starliner contract with Boeing, his main industry competitor. “The world doesn’t need another capsule,” he wrote earlier this year, referring to the long-delayed Boeing system, which returned empty this month, after encountering trouble on its first human test flight. (He has not addressed if the proposed efficiency committee would take this up.) Mr. Trump has previously faced accusations that he created conflicts when he named certain business executives as advisers. That included his appointment of Carl Icahn, the billionaire investor, as a special adviser on regulatory matters in 2017, even as Mr. Icahn was lobbying federal regulators to revamp a rule that would allow a Texas oil refinery he partly owned to save hundreds of millions of dollars. Mr. Icahn ended up stepping down from the unpaid role only months after he was appointed, after broad criticism of the arrangement. Richard Briffault, a Columbia University professor of law who has served as chair of the New York City Conflicts of Interest Board, said that there might be an advantage to having Mr. Musk as a formal adviser to Mr. Trump — because that would at least require some disclosure of the advice he was offering. “Having this in public as opposed to having Elon Musk calling up the White House and saying, ‘Hey, this agency is coming down hard on me. Get them to back off,’ — is that even worse?” Mr. Briffault said. “It’s an open question.” Methodology The New York Times analyzed transaction-level contract and grant data from usaspending.gov between the 2013 and 2023 fiscal years, calculating total obligated dollars by funding agency for businesses founded by Elon Musk. The Times consulted experts at The Pulse, a federal research and advisory firm, and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, to review the methodology. Kitty Bennett contributed research. Eric Lipton is an investigative reporter, who digs into a broad range of topics from Pentagon spending to toxic chemicals. More about Eric Lipton David A. Fahrenthold is an investigative reporter writing about nonprofit organizations. He has been a reporter for two decades. More about David A. Fahrenthold Kirsten Grind is an investigative business reporter writing stories about companies, chief executives and billionaires across Silicon Valley and the technology industry. More about Kirsten Grind |
442900
From: ryan, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump vows to make Musk head of "government efficiency...
| seems he would just make it more efficient in shoveling cash into his pocket... |
442924
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump vows to make Musk head of "government efficiency...
|
was watching a youtube podcast today and it was Walz referring to Elon as Trump's running mate. Then Walz called Musk a dipshit LOL. I spit my coffee on my monitor! He nailed it, though. I like that guy, Walz LOL. |
Responses:
None
442901
From: ryan, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump vows to make Musk head of "government efficiency...
URL: https://thehill.com/policy/technology/4947335-elon-musk-trump-government-contracts/
|
just like rump is for rump, musk is for musk... What a Trump win could mean for Elon Musk’s businesses by Miranda Nazzaro - 10/22/24 3:56 PM ET Elon Musk is wearing multiple hats this election season, sparking questions about how his dual role as a tech leader and vocal surrogate for former President Trump could lead to conflicts of interest. Musk, the owner of Tesla and SpaceX, holds government contracts worth billions of dollars with more than a dozen federal agencies. While Trump has waffled on whether Musk would be a part of his second administration, the tech magnate has been floated to lead a panel focused on cutting government costs. Former government officials and ethics experts suggest Musk’s leadership of a new “government efficiency commission,” which could oversee the agencies that grant government contracts and subsidies to Musk-owned companies, could risk the panel’s objectivity and fairness. Regardless of whether Musk takes on an actual role in the administration, the “optics” of his alliance with Trump will raise questions for voters, according to John P. Pelissero, the director of government ethics at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University. “A reasonable individual can look at a situation such as that of a very wealthy individual who has government contracts coming into the government where he would be put in a position where he could influence current and future contracts and regulations of his businesses,” he said. A New York Times analysis published Monday found Tesla, Musk’s electric vehicle company, and SpaceX, his aerospace firm, have inked $15.4 billion in government contracts over the past decade. NASA and the Department of Defense have the largest contracts with SpaceX, equal to $11.8 billion and $3.6 billion, respectively, over the past 10 years, according to the analysis. Space Force, the military branch formed under Trump, is a major supplier of these contracts. Just last week, it awarded SpaceX more than $733 million for a new batch of rocket launches. NASA is an even bigger supplier of grants as it becomes increasingly reliant on SpaceX for government space programs, while Tesla receives millions in government subsidies. As government agencies continue to work with or regulate his businesses, Musk has taken a major shift into right-wing politics following his endorsement of Trump in July. Weeks later, Trump pledged to establish a “government efficiency commission” to conduct a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government and make recommendations for drastic reforms. The former president said Musk should lead this commission, and the tech mogul signaled he would be willing to, though it remains unclear exactly what the panel would do. Musk last month suggested SpaceX could reach Mars “so long as it is not smothered by bureaucracy,” and called Trump’s proposed department “the only path to extending life beyond Earth.” Musk’s “fortune, making him the richest man in the world, is based on government contracts like SpaceX and subsidized businesses like Tesla,” former Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Tom Wheeler told The Hill. “If he is that dependent on the decisions of government, he either needs to totally divest in order to do anything in government, or not take the kind of positions that have been promised or been suggested,” Wheeler said, adding the circumstances are “an existential threat for responsible government.” The FCC is responsible for granting and rescinding broadband subsidies for SpaceX’s Starlink satellite units. Musk criticized the agency this month for what he said was “illegally” revoking some Starlink subsidies. Pelissero echoed Wheeler, suggesting Musk must put his financial interest in his companies in a blind trust to prevent him from directly influencing the financial outcomes of his ventures. Musk is not the first to potentially face this crossroads, as it is not unusual for business leaders who have worked with the government to be offered gigs in the White House. “But … they have to do so in ways that create distance from any conflicts of interest that they might have, and they’d be required to disclose any conflicts of interest while they’re serving in a government position,” Pelissero noted. Musk has become an increasingly visible part of the Trump campaign in recent weeks. He appeared at a campaign rally alongside Trump earlier this month and kicked off his own campaign swing across Pennsylvania last week. Last week, he pledged to pay up to $1 million each day to a new Pennsylvania voter who signed the America PAC’s petition to support free speech and the right to bear arms, causing concerns about the pledge’s legality. Campaign finance records show Musk personally contributed $75 million to the super PAC, which he founded earlier this year. His campaign involvement, coupled with his ownership of the social platform X, has put the billionaire in a somewhat unprecedented position, Pelissero said. “Musk is out there campaigning for Trump in a very active way. He’s using his money to significantly help one candidate who’s running for office, and he has this social media platform X, in which he can amplify his views and try to again influence the outcome,” he said. “There’s free speech to cover all of that, but he has a particularly unique role as the major owner of a social media company in which he can use this not only to benefit Trump, but ultimately to benefit himself.” While concerns may persist over conflicting interests, the public nature of Trump and Musk’s alliance might mitigate its impact, said Eugene Gholz, a professor at the University of Notre Dame. He noted there is still a considerable risk with Musk’s potential role. “Some people might fear that Trump and Musk coming into office would change the rules to exempt themselves from such rules. Whether they would or not is a different question,” he said, adding, “They’ve certainly pushed the envelope. But Elon Musk is certainly not hiding his political interest.” “It’s hard to say that this is some kind of insider backroom dealing. And presidents are entitled to appoint their rich friends to office. Lots of presidents do that.” Should Trump be reelected and appoint Musk to a senior post, the conflict created could be one that voters deemed acceptable, suggested Gholz, a former Pentagon employee. “If voters know in advance about a publicly planned conflict of interest, perhaps it is up to those voters to decide to vote against the politician proposing the seemingly corrupt activities,” he said. “And if the voters think that those activities do not constitute ‘corruption,’ then that might matter in some way.” There are “mandatory recusals in place,” including cooling off periods and blind trust requirements to prevent this, Gholz noted. “Under the current rules — and it would probably take an act of Congress to change these things — it would clearly be illegal for Elon Musk to award contracts to SpaceX if Elon Musk were a government employee,” he said. Whether this is adequate protection is a different story. Should Musk recuse himself and authority be handed to his deputy staff, questions could still arise about whether their interests are independent of their boss, Gholz said. Musk’s ramped-up political activity appears to already be causing issues for SpaceX. Earlier this month, the majority of the California Coastal Commission denied a request from SpaceX to increase the number of Falcon 9 rockets launched from Vandenberg Space Force Base. While the panel did not attribute the decision to Musk’s political involvement, a handful of commissioners made note of it during a public hearing. One commissioner said SpaceX is being led by someone who has “aggressively injected himself into the presidential race and made it clear what his point of view is,” while another said Musk is “is hopping around the country, spewing and tweeting political falsehoods and attacking FEMA.” SpaceX has sued the commission, accusing members of political bias. |
Responses:
None