Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Welcome to the Musk era of unchecked conflicts

Opinion

Welcome to the Musk era of unchecked conflicts

Elon Musk speaks during CPAC-DC at the Gaylord National Resort in Oxon Hill, M.D., on Feb. 20, 2025.

Dominic Gwinn/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images

When the computers arrived at City Hall in January of 2002, they were the talk of the town.

Known as “The Bloomberg,” the system of flat-screen terminals used to crunch real-time market data made famous by their namesake mogul Mike Bloomberg, were sent to populate the new mayor of New York City’s wall-less office, known to his staffers as The Bullpen.


Bloomberg donated the 35 terminals — sparing the city the minimum $1,285 per month to run them — so that his aides could get right to work. “It was just the fastest way to get the office set up with computers,” his comms director said.

But, like Bloomberg himself, they came with potential conflicts of interest. Would Bloomberg profit in any way from installing his proprietary technology? What of his stocks and investments? His financial dealings and media company? Bloomberg wasn’t your typical politician — he stood to benefit significantly from his role as both mayor and mogul.

His transition was much scrutinized. Headlines like “ Mayor Brings His Gadgets, And Thorny Conflict Issues ” ran in The New York Times and elsewhere. The city Conflicts of Interest Board released reports on his business dealings. Bloomberg ended up stepping down from his management role at his company, resigned from several boards, and his firm said it would not accept tax breaks that it had negotiated with the city, and donated seven other terminals that were being leased by the city.

But while Bloomberg was mostly compliant with rules attempting to deconflict him, he also “greatly blurred the lines between his personal business and the city’s,” with at least 33 of his clients’ firms — including Merrill Lynch — continuing to do business with the city while he was mayor.

It was something of a test case for the complications that can occur when vast sums of money and power mix.

That all seems quaint today, however, when compared with the guy who’s apparently in charge of the U.S. government.

Elon Musk, the billionaire mogul and politics hobbyist, is perhaps now the most conflicted person in the history of American government, and to make matters infinitely worse, he is operating in the shadows.

As head of DOGE — President Trump’s new government efficiency endeavor — Musk is now overseeing nearly every federal agency, including a slew that directly regulate his own businesses, like the FAA, NASA, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Needless to say, despite reassuring us that he’ll monitor his own conflicts, they are seemingly everywhere and endless.

Musk’s DOGE has reportedly recommended firing workers at the FDA, which regulates Musk’s Neuralink devices; USAID, which oversaw and financed his Starlink technology; FAA, which regulates SpaceX; CFPB, which regulates Tesla’s financing; NHTSA and NLRB, which are involved in regulating both Tesla and X, formerly Twitter; the SEC, which has investigated Musk’s takeover of Twitter; and ostensibly more to come.

And the FAA has announced it will use Starlink to upgrade the IT networks it uses to manage our skies. Of course, the amount of the contract has not been disclosed as of yet.

Even compared to Trump, who not only entangled his businesses with the presidency, but his own family members, Musk’s simultaneously ambiguous and omnipotent role at DOGE seemingly has him in charge of hiring and firing, budgets, data and information at the very agencies that can make his businesses thrive or suffer.

If that sounds like a bad idea, it definitely is, especially for a guy known to prefer a chainsaw to a scalpel as he goes about the business of “government efficiency.”

It’s sort of like making the arsonist the new fire chief — and the head of HR, and the lead accountant, and the chief information officer — while also awarding him a contract for accelerants.

And the cherry on top is the lack of transparency — White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt wouldn’t even say who is actually running DOGE.

But with Musk’s office conveniently inside the White House complex, and a seat at Trump’s first Cabinet meeting this week, the only thing that is clear is he has unprecedented access to the president and nearly all federal agencies.

Even without conflicts that would be an outsized amount of power for someone who was neither elected nor confirmed by the Senate. With them, we could be in for untold new levels of corruption, self-interest, cronyism, and self-motivated vengeance inside the government.

Will voters revolt? Will Republican lawmakers care? Will Democrats be able to stop it? As is becoming the norm under Trump 2.0, we just don’t know.

S.E. Cupp: Welcome to the Musk era of unchecked conflicts was originally published by the Tribune Content Agency and is shared with permission. S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.

Read More

Ending taxes on home sales would benefit the wealthiest households most – part of a larger pattern in Trump tax plans

File:Homes-for-sale-Burrus-02.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

Ending taxes on home sales would benefit the wealthiest households most – part of a larger pattern in Trump tax plans

Not long after U.S. housing prices reached a record high this summer – the median existing home went for US$435,000 in June – President Donald Trump said that he was considering a plan to make home sales tax-free.

Supporters of the idea, introduced by U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene as the No Tax on Home Sales Act in July, say it would benefit working families by eliminating all taxes on the sales of family homes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: $100,000 Visa Executive Order

"Just the Facts" on the new $100,000 H-1B visa fee, its impact on tech firms, startups, and healthcare, plus legal challenges and alternatives for skilled workers.

Getty Images, Popartic

Just the Facts: $100,000 Visa Executive Order

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

What Is the $100,000 Visa Fee?

This is a new one-time $100,000 application fee for employers seeking to sponsor foreign workers under the H-1B visa program. The visa is designed for highly skilled professionals in fields like tech, medicine, and engineering.

Keep ReadingShow less
Monetary vs. Fiscal Policy: Why Both Disrupt Free Markets—and Neither Is Inherently Conservative or Progressive

Dave Anderson shares how the Fed’s rate cuts reveal misconceptions about fiscal vs. monetary policy and government intervention in U.S. free markets.

Getty Images, Royalty-free

Monetary vs. Fiscal Policy: Why Both Disrupt Free Markets—and Neither Is Inherently Conservative or Progressive

The Federal Reserve Board's move on Wednesday, Sept. 17, to lower the federal funds interest rate by one-quarter of a point signals that it is a good time to discuss a major misconception that most voters have about public policy.

It is typically assumed that Democrats stand for government intervention into free markets to counteract the inherent bias towards those who are more economically well off. It is also assumed that Republicans, in contrast, reject the idea of government intervention in free markets because it violates rights to property and the natural order of free markets, which promotes the greatest total welfare.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of a nurse's hand resting on the shoulder of an older man who's hand rests on top.

September is World Alzheimer’s Awareness Month. Dr. Dona Kim Murphey explains how systemic failures, Medicare privatization, and racial disparities are deepening the dementia care crisis.

Getty Images, PeopleImages

Profits Over Patients: Re-Examining Systems As Culprit in Dementia Care (or Lack Thereof)

September is World Alzheimer's Awareness Month. Alzheimer's is the most common kind of dementia, a disorder characterized by the progressive loss of brain cells and, in its final stages, complete dependence—the inability to remember, speak, move, or even eat or swallow unassisted. Many end up in nursing homes. Seven million people are impacted by dementia in the United States today, a number that will more than double in the next 25 years.

But awareness is not just about understanding the magnitude of the problem or content expertise on the choices we make as individuals to mitigate the enormous present and future challenges of this disease. It is about a consciousness of the role of systems, namely insurance and government, that are seriously undermining our ability to care.

Keep ReadingShow less