Earlier this week, it was revealed that President Donald Trump has given multibillionaire Elon Musk, head of the quasi-official Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a “special government employee” designation.
That designation means that Musk — the world’s richest person and an ardent Trump supporter who paid hundreds of millions of dollars of his own wealth to ensure that Trump would win the 2024 presidential race — will not be considered a full-time employee, but is also not viewed as a volunteer for the government. A special government employee works 130 days or less during a 365-day calendar.
Musk’s work with DOGE has allowed him unprecedented (and unchecked) access and powers in the federal government. Since Trump took office, Musk has used that role to disrupt the work and expenditures of programs within the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). He has also been granted access to Treasury Department systems that account for nearly all payments made by the federal government, including Social Security.
Musk has these powers despite receiving no congressional approval. The only authorization he has been given is an executive order declaration, which cannot create a whole federal department without oversight.
Special government employees are held to strict standards, which Musk appears to be flouting. According to a Justice Department document, such employees are restricted “from participating in a matter” that directly involve their own “financial interests” as well as the interests of any immediate family members, organizations or companies they are tied to.
Given that two of Musk’s companies have received over $15.4 billion in government contracts over the past 10 years — and that his companies are frequently the subject of oversight and investigations from federal departments and agencies — it’s clear that that standard isn’t being followed.
In response to Musk’s actions being met with widespread criticism, Trump sought to assure reporters on Monday that the billionaire’s work was all under his purview, and that Musk wasn’t taking any action without the president’s authority.
“He’s got access only to letting people go that he thinks are no good, if we agree with him. And it’s only if we agree with him,” Trump said.
But this conflicts with reports from other Trump administration officials. Citing discussions with a White House official who had knowledge of Musk’s work, The New York Times has reported that “Musk was widely seen as operating with a level of autonomy that almost no one can control.”
Beyond Musk himself, little is known of the inexperienced set of individuals working beside him within DOGE, who have the same access to Treasury Department systems and other government agencies’ files that Musk now has. Among the seven workers (who are reportedly between the ages of 19 and 25) is an engineer named Marko Elez, who has worked for Musk-owned companies before. It’s unclear whether Elez, or any other DOGE worker, also has special government employee status, but if they do, they, too, would be running afoul of conflict of interest standards.
Lawmakers in Congress could feasibly stop this situation altogether by asserting legislative branch powers and making calls for checks and balances. But with both chambers controlled by Trump-aligned Republicans, some lawmakers appear to have acquiesced to Musk and Trump.
“What Musk is doing “runs afoul of the Constitution in the strictest sense,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina) recently admitted. “[But] it’s not uncommon for presidents to flex a little bit on where they can spend and where they can stop spending.”
Democrats in Congress, meanwhile, have described Musk’s work as likely illegal.
At a press conference at the Capitol on Monday, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Washington), vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee agreed, stating:
An unelected, unaccountable billionaire with expansive conflicts of interest, deep ties to China and an indiscreet ax to grind against perceived enemies is hijacking our nation’s most sensitive financial data systems and its checkbook so that he can illegally block funds to our constituents based on the slightest whim or wildest conspiracy.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) lambasted Musk for his power grab.
“I just want to be clear about what’s going on here. The system that makes sure that your granddad gets his Social Security check; the system that makes sure that your mom’s doctor gets Medicare payment to cover her medical appointment; and the system that makes sure that you get the tax refund that you’re owed; has been taken over by Elon Musk,” Warren said on Monday, adding that Musk “and his handful of friends now have full access to your personal and financial information that’s in the system.”
“Elon just grabbed the controls of our whole payment system, demanding the power to turn it on for his friends or turn it off for anyone he doesn’t like,” Warren went on.
In an interview with Democracy Now! Host Amy Goodman earlier this week, Democratic Party strategist Waleed Shahid described the situation in similarly harrowing terms.
“If this story was taking place somewhere in Central Asia or in Africa, the United States media, the United States State Department, international institutions would likely refer to this as a coup,” Shahid said. “A billionaire industrialist who donated $300 million to a campaign is installing his personal loyalists in key parts of the federal bureaucracy.”
“We need to know: Why does a billionaire industrialist, with millions in government contracts, military contracts for his private companies, need the Social Security numbers of every American, needs to know what every single check that the U.S. government gives out to businesses, to charities? Why does this billionaire need to know this information?” Shahid added.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.