BY CLINT COMBS
Elon Musk’s expanding influence — spanning political campaigns, government policy, and bureaucratic overhauls — has challenged the norms of checks and balances in American governance not seen since the Andrew Johnson Administration. Whether it’s his covert political spending or ambitious plans to overhaul the federal bureaucracy, Musk’s actions have highlighted the vast power of billionaires in shaping the future of both government and political systems, often with minimal oversight and accountability.
At a virtual zoom event sponsored by Public Citizen, Jon Golinger detailed how campaign finance laws — particularly those around disclosure and disclaimers — are failing to arm voters with crucial information about who is funding political messages. This lack of transparency, Golinger argues, has left voters in the dark and allowed the world’s richest man to exert influence without accountability.
Golinger emphasized the importance of transparency for an informed electorate. “When voters have real information about who’s feeding them ads, they make good decisions,” he said, before diving into a specific case study on Musk’s covert spending during the 2022 election.
“We all know who’s running the show right now,” Golinger said referring to Musk. “It seems like he’s the actual president at the moment.” This comment set the stage for a deep dive into Musk’s political spending and the tactics used to conceal his influence from the public. Golinger pointed to a New York Times article revealing that Musk’s companies had been under investigation by over a dozen federal agencies, adding another layer of complexity to Musk’s political involvement. (For example, 375,000 Tesla vehicles have been recalled due to power steering efficiencies). “Mr. Musk has half a dozen companies that have been the subject of several dozen investigations,” Golinger said, before connecting the dots to Musk’s substantial political donations.
Golinger detailed how Musk spent over a quarter billion dollars in the 2022 election, much of it funneled through opaque channels. He focused on a particularly deceptive instance where Musk’s $20 million donation to the RBG PAC remained largely undisclosed until after the election. “This is how they hide it,” Golinger explained, referring to the loopholes in federal law that allow donors to remain anonymous if their contributions are timed correctly. The RBG PAC — named after Ruth Bader Ginsburg — ran abortion-themed ads promoting Donald Trump’s more moderate stance on abortion, but didn’t reveal Musk’s involvement until after voters had cast their ballots.
Despite federal laws requiring disclaimers on campaign ads, the only required message was something vague like “Paid for by RBG PAC.” “There was no indication that Musk, one of the wealthiest people in the world, was behind this multimillion-dollar campaign,” Golinger said. He argued that this kind of covert spending is not only legal but also quite common, especially after the Citizens United decision opened the floodgates for unlimited, anonymous political donations.
“The system is broken, and the voters are not getting the full picture,” Golinger said. He emphasized that stronger disclosure laws, at both the federal and state levels, are crucial to addressing this issue. While Citizens United made it easier for wealthy individuals like Musk to influence elections, it also affirmed the importance of transparency. “Disclosure permits citizens and shareholders to give proper weight to the different speakers and messages,” Golinger said. However, the loopholes that allow donors to conceal their identities until after the election still leave voters in the dark about who is truly shaping their votes.
Golinger’s call for reform is echoed by Erin Chlopak from the Campaign Legal Center, who added “The unchecked power of these wealthy individuals is fundamentally undermining democracy.” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse also weighed in, critiquing the Supreme Court’s refusal to acknowledge the consequences of Citizens United. “The unchecked influence of a few billionaires like Musk is shaping the future of American governance, and it’s time the Court and Congress address this before it’s too late,” he said. The power of billionaires, Whitehouse noted, is a “profoundly damaging force in American democracy.”
Musk’s influence is not limited to the political arena. He has also set his sights on reshaping the federal bureaucracy, a move that raises serious constitutional concerns. Musk and his team of so-called “Department of Government Efficiency” workers have about six months of temporary access to overhaul key aspects of the federal government. Their mission? To ransack key aspects of popular agencies — like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — and render them useless without Republican lawmakers taking a vote.
One of the most vocal critics is Nick Bednar, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, who told reporters that Musk’s actions could run afoul of federal laws protecting government employees. Bednar points to the potential risks of allowing Musk’s team to push through changes without sufficient checks and balances. “The federal government has more data on American citizens than almost any other institution,” Bednar said. “If we’re removing the guardrails that protect that data, there’s no telling who might gain access to it.”
Another key legal issue revolves around the handling of government employees. Bednar highlighted that if non-responses to Musk’s emails are treated as resignations, this would violate federal law, which mandates that resignations be voluntary. “This isn’t voluntary. It’s more like a threat,” Bednar argued, comparing the situation to someone being forced to respond to an ultimatum under duress.
The proposed changes come at a time when scrutiny over the influence of billionaires in public policy is reaching new heights, especially given Musk’s track record of using his wealth to shape political discourse. Musk’s proposed overhaul shows that without proper oversight, these changes could lead to significant abuses of power and further erode democratic norms. Musk’s ambition to reshape government institutions could leave employees and the public vulnerable if these changes are made without full transparency and respect for existing legal frameworks.
Both Elon Musk’s involvement in political campaigns, and his efforts to reshape government, highlight concerns about the concentration of power among a small group of billionaires. Despite this, many Democrats, including House Minority Whip Hakeem Jeffries, have been strikingly reluctant to take a firm stand against figures like Musk and Trump. For instance, Jeffries refused to call for the removal of New York Mayor Eric Adams, even after the DOJ dropped charges against him in exchange for his cooperation to Trump’s mass deportation order.
The fight for electoral reform and government accountability is not just about changing laws — it’s about empowering the public and restoring integrity to the political process. As Golinger puts it, “When voters have the real information, they make good decisions.” Now, more than ever, it is essential for those who care about democracy ensure that transparency and accountability are restored within both political campaigns and government institutions.
