Elon Musk’s enthusiastic support for Donald Trump in the upcoming US election extends far beyond fiery tweets and campaign contributions. The world’s wealthiest individual has become increasingly prominent in Trump’s campaign, essentially placing his personal X account, boasting nearly 200 million followers, at the candidate’s disposal. This involvement has raised significant concerns about the potential implications of Musk’s influence on a second Trump administration.
Following a second purported assassination attempt on Trump, Musk questioned why Democratic candidate Kamala Harris and President Joe Biden have not faced similar threats. He later deleted the post. Musk has also utilized his platform to endorse the unsubstantiated conspiracy theory that a Haitian immigrant community in Ohio was stealing and consuming pets belonging to the predominantly white population.
Beyond these publicly visible actions, Musk has reached an agreement with Trump to spearhead a special commission tasked with reducing federal spending. This initiative, fueled by a casual conversation between the two on X in August, aims to implement “drastic reforms.” Musk proposed a “government efficiency commission” to ensure prudent utilization of taxpayer funds. Trump enthusiastically embraced the idea, praising Musk as “the greatest cutter,” a reference to the Tesla and SpaceX founder’s uncompromising approach to managing his companies.
“When your employees stop working, you say ‘That’s OK… every one of you is gone,’” Trump remarked admiringly, referencing Musk’s 2022 acquisition of Twitter, subsequently renamed X. This takeover led to a 75% reduction in staff, retaining only those willing to embrace Musk’s “hardcore” workplace philosophy. The mass layoffs decimated content moderation teams, paving the way for Musk’s control over the platform, resulting in a surge in misinformation and an exodus of advertisers.
The New York Times reports that Musk and Trump have engaged in regular discussions concerning Musk’s management philosophy, fueled by the hope that the billionaire could impose it on the US government in a second Trump administration. When queried on the “All-In” podcast about the potential for annual cuts to federal staff of 5% (approximately 150,000 workers), Musk responded, “I think we’d need to do more than that.” He declined to elaborate further, claiming that doing so would risk “assassination,” but assured that workers would have time to secure new positions. “The number of disgruntled workers, former government employees will be quite a scary number,” he added ominously.
Public policy scholars have cautioned that Musk may be overestimating his potential influence. In the United States, the power to reduce government jobs rests with Congress, which controls the government’s finances. “Our system doesn’t allow that concentration of power into any one office or any one individual that allows them to just rule by fiat the way that Musk can do at X, Tesla or SpaceX,” stated Casey Burgat, director of the legislative affairs program at George Washington University.
However, others fear that a second Trump administration could fundamentally alter the rules, particularly with a conservative-dominated Supreme Court wielding final authority over the laws of the land. The nine-member court, now dominated by conservatives, including several Trump appointees, has recently issued rulings expanding the powers of the White House. Richard Barton, assistant teaching professor at Syracuse University, suggests that Trump might choose to “do whatever he wants and let somebody file a lawsuit and bring it to the Supreme Court, who have been pretty favorable to Trump on matters of executive power.”
Questions of conflict of interest, blatantly apparent to many observers, seem to hold little weight for either Trump or Musk. Musk’s diverse business ventures are deeply intertwined with the government, whether as a supplier to NASA in the case of SpaceX or as a subject of regulation for Tesla, which frequently faces scrutiny over safety concerns. Trump, meanwhile, has a history of appointing family members to high-ranking government positions and faces persistent accusations of blurring the lines between his business interests and his public service duties.
Enforcing conflict-of-interest rules necessitates the political will of Congress, which, according to Burgat, exhibited little action against blatant breaches during the first Trump administration. “There’s no umpire calling fouls here,” Burgat told AFP.
Musk’s growing involvement in Trump’s campaign raises significant concerns about the potential impact on American democracy and the balance of power if Trump were to return to the White House. His proposed radical changes to the federal government, coupled with his unyielding management philosophy, could lead to a dangerous concentration of power, potentially undermining the very foundations of American democracy.
