Musk’s Mayhem Continues Beyond DOGE Into Our Everyday Lives
Support CleanTechnica's work through a Substack subscription, on Patreon, or on Stripe. Help us produce all of the high-quality, original content we publish week after week despite the challenges of content-scraping AI, antisocial media, inflation, and other hurdles.
It’s been over a year since Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) charged into the US federal government. His team fired thousands of government employees.
Then they realized that so many problems emerged that they had to restaff many of those positions. Oops!
It wasn’t lack of efficiency that turned out to be the DOGE problem. It was Musk’s lack of understanding about how the way the federal government works that stymied substantive, positive change.
Holding Musk Accountable for his Hubris
Employees from Elon Musk’s DODE had a mandate: cancel previously approved grants that were not in sync with President Trump’s agenda. They created a prompt and entered it into the ChatGPT AI chatbot.
“Does the following relate at all to DEI? Respond factually in less than 120 characters. Begin with ‘Yes’ or ‘No.’”
As the AI answers poured in, DOGE employees failed to critically analyze ChatGPT’s conclusions. They blindly moved forward with the findings.
Nearly every active grant made during the Biden administration had to go.
In an about-face, some employees that were fired by DOGE have been rehired. For example, the General Services Administration (GSA) is the US federal agency that supervises the IT department and federal real estate holdings. In a complete reversal, the GSA is hiring “approximately 400 positions” across its Public Building Service (PBS) division.
A joint motion filed by plaintiffs the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association, the Modern Language Association, and the Authors Guild argues that DOGE illegally took control. In doing so, its actions violated the First Amendment and the equal protection clause of the Constitution. The plaintiffs seek reinstatement of their grants.
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is part of a group of legislators that has sought information from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent about ways that Musk may have tried to persuade the Trump administration to suspend the Corporate Transparency Act. The 2021 law requires companies to report information about their ownership to the government. The Trump administration has shown little interest in enforcing the Act.
Could Musk have influenced the Trump administration’s disinterest in transparency? It has been revealed that Musk draws upon a clandestine network of limited liability companies to buy land and homes in Texas, which permits such companies to decline to disclose key information about their ownership structure and to disguise spending. After all, Musk is at the helm of at least 90 private companies in Texas with limited liability.
That same limited liability mechanism was in place to bolster Trump’s re-election campaign.
Former US Labor Secretary Robert Reich reminds us that Musk’s injection of millions of dollars of campaign financing to Republican candidates doesn’t always have the intended effect. Wisconsin Judge Susan Crawford fought back against the odds to win her seat on the state’s highest court. “The public was outraged that the richest person in the world was spending some of his massive wealth on the election,” Reich says. “They also recoiled at the wreckage Musk wrought at DOGE. And his unbridled racism.”
In July the Wisconsin Elections Commission — comprised of three Democrats and three Republicans — voted 5-1 that there is probable cause Elon Musk violated Wisconsin Statute 12.11 for election bribery, a felony. The reason? As a giveaway during the 2025 state Supreme Court race, Musk offered a “random” opportunity for Wisconsin voters to have “a daily chance of winning $1M!” Two weeks later, Musk ‘s lawyers told a Pennsylvania state court, under oath, the opposite. Instead, Musk’s legal team vetted the recipients ahead of time, testifying that the petition functioned “like a job application” and that signers were screened for political alignment with the PAC’s mission before they could be selected.
Now we wait to see if Wisconsin pursues charges against one more in a long list of Musk’s mayhem.
Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman offers hope for more voter reaction to billionaire influence like Musk’s. “The strategy of highlighting oligarch support as a reason not to vote for politicians can and should extend beyond Musk money,” he says. Krugman suggests a plan in which Democrats in upcoming midterm elections should “address corporate tax giveaways, shrinking paychecks, loss of healthcare, epidemics, loss of SNAP benefits and, yes, predatory data centers.”
Beware the Promises of Musk
Musk’s SpaceX public offering was seen as a windfall for the company’s executives, employees, and investors,. After all, many had their investment portfolios tied up in Musk’s promises and have had to be patient to see the financial reward for their faith in SpaceX. Musk has stated that orbital data centers would be the cheapest way to satisfy AI computational needs in just a few years, so that “sustainable abundance” — in which companies collaborate with AI and robotics products to solve global poverty and strife — can be achieved.
“He wants to have people that are totally beholden to him and Donald Trump making sure that we’re getting tax cuts for billionaires on the back of our healthcare system, on the back of our hospitals,” Troy Jackson, the Democratic nominee for US Senate in Maine, said in a video message released Sunday. Calling Musk’s campaign contributions part of “dirty money,” Jackson continued, “You don’t get to buy the government that you want. This is about all of us coming together and fighting for the government that we deserve, and you’re not in it.”
Remember the lofty solar vision that Musk imparted when he pushed the acquisition of his brother’s imperiled Solar City? Lloyd Lee notes on Business Insider that Tesla has switched from its own solar generation to two long-term agreements to purchase power from utility-scale solar projects. They’ll total about 600 megawatts of planned capacity. The 2016 Solar City purchase, costing Tesla $2.6 billion, was envisioned as a way to create a one-stop solution to merge solar energy, battery storage, and EVs.
What a difference a decade makes.
References
“A year after DOGE cuts, GSA now plans to hire hundreds of employees.” Leah Feiger and Zoë Schiffer. Wired. April 3, 2026.
“Democrats examine Elon Musk’s role in suspension of business disclosure law.” Kirsten Grind and Susanne Craig. New York Times. March 30, 2026.
“Elon Musk’s solar ambitions have shifted from powering homes to powering Tesla’s AI era.” Lloyd Lee. Business Insider. July 28, 2026.
“The oligarchs are doubling down on Republicans. And Democrats should make the most of it.” Paul Krugman. Substack. August 4, 2026.
“Troy Jackson: My response to Elon Musk trying to buy this race.” YouTube. August 2, 2026.
“The stink of Musk. It should cling to any candidate he’s supporting.” Robert Reich. Substack. August 3, 2026.
“When DOGE unleashed ChatGPT on the humanities.” Jennifer Schuessler. New York Times. March 7, 2026.
Sign up for CleanTechnica's Weekly Substack for Zach and Scott's in-depth analyses and high level summaries, sign up for our daily newsletter, and follow us on Google News!
Have a tip for CleanTechnica? Want to advertise? Want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.
Sign up for our daily newsletter for 15 new cleantech stories a day. Or sign up for our weekly one on top stories of the week if daily is too frequent.
CleanTechnica uses affiliate links. See our policy here.
CleanTechnica's Comment Policy
