February 5, 2025 • 42 mins
Is Elon Musk reshaping the federal bureaucracy with a new Department of Government Efficiency, or is this an overreach of executive power? We're examining the controversial moves by Trump and Musk to close down USAID without congressional approval, raising critical legal questions about the constitutional boundaries of their actions. With legal experts weighing in, we'll explore the potential conflicts and implications, especially considering the Anti-Deficiency Act, and draw parallels to past administrations.
Our conversation ventures into the unsettling influence of billionaires on American politics. We scrutinize Elon Musk’s role and the OSHA violations linked to Tesla, questioning the impact of concentrated wealth on democratic processes. Through a compelling dialogue with friend Will on Instagram, we challenge the idea that local governance can effectively counterbalance corporate power and debunk the myth that Trump represents a break from traditional political corruption.
American society stands at a crossroads where corporate power and democracy collide. As we discuss bipartisan efforts, like the push to cap credit card interest rates, we reflect on the need for the Democratic Party to reconnect with its working-class roots. We're unpacking how the influence of billionaires has shaped policy and risked progress on critical issues, drawing stark contrasts between the U.S. and other developed nations. Join us for this urgent exploration of wealth's impact on American politics, governance, and the future trajectory of our society.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
The many questions surrounding Musk's efforts and
Doge's efforts.
De facto closing of USAID isamong Trump's administration
moves that test legal boundariestook office.
Legal observers were skepticalof his plans for an Elon
(00:26):
Musk-led Department ofGovernment Efficiency to
unilaterally shrink the size ofthe federal bureaucracy.
Questions have grown in theweeks since he has been back in
the White House and reached anew flashpoint with the
administration de facto shutdownof US agencies for
(00:47):
international development.
So a rundown of severalquestions that issues that are
in play Can the administrationeffectively shut down USAID or
USAID or USAID Now?
Usaid has carried out a foreignassistance program since 1961,
(01:12):
and Congress in 1998 establishedit as an independent agency,
though closely intertwined withthe State Department.
It is highly unlikely thatTrump and Musk can formally wipe
out the agency by merging itinto the State Department
without legislative approval.
What happened in recent days isshort of what leaves some of
(01:35):
the administration's moves in agray area.
The agency headquarters wasclosed on Monday and many of its
functions and communicationswere crippled.
Doge officials sought access tothe agency system over the
weekend.
Now the Trump administrationsees USID as a place to start
what they can, basically to seewhat they can do and who will
(02:01):
stop them do and who will stopthem Now?
That came from MatthewKavanaugh, who is a director of
the Center of Global HealthPolicy and Politics at
Georgetown University.
Now USAID works heavily withgovernment contractors and the
administration has moreflexibility in dealing with them
than government employees.
It also has some wiggle room topause spending and put workers
(02:25):
on temporary leaves.
But the wholesale refusal byTrump to spend agencies' foreign
aid funds would run along intothe Nixon-era federal law known
as the Empowered Control Act of1974, which requires the
president to get permission fromCongress to withhold any
(02:47):
discretionary spending.
So Brian Riddle, a formerRepublican Senate aide now at
the conservative leaningManhattan Institute, said he
thinks the president's US IDoverhaul has inventeda
constitutional crisis.
Quote the president can't takeback the funding, he said.
Some legal scholars say thepresident has more room to
(03:10):
control spending on mattersrelated to national security and
foreign affairs, and USpresidents, going back to Thomas
Jefferson, who halted fundingfor gunboats to patrol the
Mississippi River, haveimpounded and appropriated money
.
Trump's top lawyer at theOffice of Management and Budget
(03:33):
has argued that the 1974impoundment law
unconstitutionally limits thepresident's power to control and
manage the executive branch, soa court showdown on the issue
could be ahead.
Now, what is Doge's actualauthority and where did it come
from?
Now, trump created Doge throughan executive order he signed
(03:56):
the day he took office,establishing Musk's outfit as a
temporary governmentorganization.
The president did so byrenaming and reorganizing an
already existing office in theexecutive branch.
His order said Doge would helpimplement his agenda by
modernizing federal technologyand software and maximizing
(04:18):
government efficiency andproductivity.
He instructed agency heads tocooperate with Doge.
Productivity.
He instructed agency heads tocooperate with Doge, but said
the creation of a neworganization didn't supplant the
power of the executivedepartments or agencies Another
order said that Doge would havea role in reshaping the federal
workforce.
Now, questions remain about whoactually works for Doge, what
(04:41):
their roles and responsibilitiesare and how it's funded.
Now, before he took office,trump created the outfit as an
advisory panel.
Doge co-chair Vivek Ramaswamyhas left, as has Bill McGinley,
who Trump appointed as Doge'slegal counsel in December.
(05:02):
Now the White House on Mondaysaid Musk had classified a
special government employee, orwas classified as a special
government employee, whichenables him to work at the White
House for 130 days is about,without filing financial
disclosure forms required forregular White House employees.
But he also raises conflicts ofinterest questions because his
(05:25):
Doge work could benefit hisbusiness interests, including
Tesla and SpaceX.
The other question is can Trumpdeputize Doge to slash the
federal government?
Now, recent pastadministrations, including under
Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton,have established advisory
(05:46):
bodies aimed at cutting spendingor making the government more
effective, but their structuresand mandates were different in
character than Doge privatesector figures with a mandate to
drain the swamp in Washington.
The group known as the GraceCommission made more than 2,400
(06:09):
recommendations, includingproposals to rethink protections
for government workers.
Now, many of thoserecommendations were never
implemented.
Now Trump, by contrast, isworking closely with Musk to
engineer significant financialand structural changes in the
government over the matter ofweeks and months.
The effort also received anunusual law enforcement backing
(06:31):
Monday from the Trumpappointment interim US attorney
in Washington, ed Martin.
Ed Martin said I ask that youutilize me and my staff to
assist in protecting the Dogework and the Doge workers.
Martin wrote in a public letterto Musk.
(06:53):
Any threats, confrontation orother actions in any way that
impact their work may breaknumerous laws, may break
numerous laws.
Now, legal observers said Trumpwas generally on solid legal
ground in creating Doge andusing it to input.
So long as the must isfunctioning as an advisor and
(07:13):
not as an actual decision maker,there isn't a problem with the
president getting advice frompeople outside of the government
, said the University ofVirginia law professor Shartish
Prakash, who studies executivepowers and the president, and he
said the president can directagencies to cooperate with that
(07:35):
advisor.
Prakash said that though therecould be privacy and national
security and computer accessrules that legally limit Musk
and Doge's access to information.
So what are the legalboundaries here that Doge is
testing?
Now?
Putting aside questions ofDoge's structure, some legal
(07:58):
experts say it could haveconduct that has so far violated
federal laws.
For example, acting on a Dogeproposal, the Office of Personal
and Management had offered adeferred resignation package to
about 2 million federalemployees, who were told that
(08:19):
they would be paid throughSeptember 30th of 2025 if they
agree to resign by February 6th.
Now this offer might haveviolated the Administrative
Leave Act of 2016, which limitshow federal employees can be put
on leave, said Nicholas Bender,a University of Minnesota law
(08:39):
professor.
Bender said another potentiallegal hurdle is the
Anti-Deficiency Act, a law thatsays the federal government
can't promise to spend money inexcess of what Congress has made
available.
So Congress has actually onlyfunded the government through
March.
So the offer to pay salariesthrough September appears to
(09:02):
violate this statute throughSeptember appears to violate
this statute, bender said.
On Monday, a coalition of laborunions sued the Treasury
Department, alleging he hadunlawfully given Doge access to
payment systems with thepersonal financial data of about
millions of Americans.
The plaintiffs said they wereseeking a court order to halt
systemic and continuous andongoing violations of federal
(09:25):
laws that protect the privacy ofpersonal information contained
in federal records.
That imposes transparencyrequirements on advisory
committees to the executivebranch, including that they meet
(09:47):
in public and have a fair andbalanced viewpoints
representative.
So, now that Trump has formallymade Doge part of the
government, some legal expertshave said that those cases may
no longer be relevant.
Cases may no longer be relevant, but Keel McClellan, a lawyer
(10:09):
who brought on the cases, saidthat the litigation is still
100% valid and to a courtdetermines that every single
person purporting to work forDoge is actually an employee of
the government entity describedin President Trump's executive
order.
So, as the opposition party,the Democrats are somewhat in
(10:29):
disarray, but the Senator fromMassachusetts, senator Elizabeth
Borman, said this.
Let's be clear about what'shappening right now.
The Trump administration hasallowed Elon Musk, an unelected
(10:51):
billionaire, along with anunknown number of his
unqualified flunkies, to accessa critical federal payment
system and illegally shut downgovernment funding for certain
department and programs.
The system that he is nowcontrolling is the same system
(11:13):
that Americans rely on toreceive Social Security payments
, medicare support, federalsalaries, government contract
grants and tax refunds.
This filing session.
What happens now?
Maybe you get paid, maybe youdon't.
It all depends on what ElonMusk thinks.
(11:34):
He can now turn on funding forhis friends and turn off funding
for anyone he doesn't like.
Now, as long as Musk has access, he can retrieve people's
sensitive personal informationsocial security numbers, bank
account numbers, tax returns.
(11:55):
Musk now has the power toextract the information for his
own use, to boost his financesor strengthen his political
power, to say the least, this isan extraordinarily dangerous
situation.
I'm working to get specificanswers from Donald Trump's new
(12:18):
Treasury Secretary on why Muskwas given access to this
information, and I have calledthe Secretary to lay out what
safeguards are in place toprotect the people's privacy and
economic security of theAmerican people On Twitter or X
or whatever Musk wants us tocall it.
(12:39):
I made the point to say that noone elected his hand-picked
Twitter CEO wasn't happy to hearthat.
She wrote back to me.
Actually, over 77 millionpeople for exactly that.
Actually, no, and I can'tbelieve I have to say this, but
(13:00):
over 77 million people did notvote for Elon Musk.
Over 77 million people votedfor Donald Trump.
Over 75 million people votedfor Kamala Harris.
Elon Musk was not on the ballot.
Elon Musk did not win a singleelectoral vote.
(13:21):
Elon Musk did not win anelection.
Elon Musk has not been confirmedby the US Senate to a position
in the administration and theConstitution doesn't give him
power any power to cut offfunding that Congress has
approved.
He is in this position becausehe spent more than $290 million
(13:41):
on the 2024 election and boughthim an opportunity to be the
co-president with Trump.
This situation is alarming.
When unelected billionairesstart ransacking our government
offices, we cannot act asbusiness as usual.
We are living in a nightmarecreated by Trump and Musk and we
(14:02):
need to wake up to do something.
I'll keep ringing every alarmbell I can and continue to do
everything in my power to getthis under control.
Now I had a conversation todayon the Darrell McLean Instagram
page, which I do post things onthere and I respond when people
(14:25):
respond to me.
So there was a Republican thatintroduced a bill to abolish the
Occupational Safety and HealthyAdministration, the federal
agency that is dedicated toprotecting the American workers'
safety and health workerssafety and health.
(14:53):
Now Tesla is a 4% of USmanufacturing, yet they made up
75% of OSHA violations.
So the postulation is that thiswas something to do with Elon.
Tesla has had three times asmany OSHA violations as the
largest US plants combined, andthat was way back in 2019, you
(15:17):
know when Tesla started gettingthose violations.
So somebody replied to mepublicly and said that it was
all about his name as well, andhe said this was just saying
that this should be handled atthe state level.
Now I because I'm a disgruntledex-Republican yada, yada, yada.
(15:40):
I told him that that was codefor, for it actually won't be
handled at all becausebillionaires buy the government
and they'll buy the stategovernment just like they bought
the federal government that Ihave seen this book play out
(16:01):
before.
If, for reference, take a lookat uh, kent McConnell and how he
destroyed the state of Kentuckyand why it has been one of the
poorest states as MitchMcConnell took charge, I went on
to say that I don't have asmuch faith in politicians and as
(16:24):
in billionaires, and this isabout cheap labor and cheap
unprotected labor as well.
Now, if you want to learn aboutmitch mcconnell and what he did
to kentucky, I suggest a bookthat I read called mitch please
how mitch mcconnell sold outkentucky and american.
(16:46):
Two by matt jones with christallman Sold Out Kentucky in
America.
2 by Matt Jones with ChrisTallman, the founder of Kentucky
Sports Radio, and it was aneye-opening book, very good read
, and the book was called MitchPlease.
Now Will responded to me andsaid he actually doesn't trust
(17:06):
politicians and that's why he'sfor limited government,
especially the federalgovernment, and he's for the
smallest federal governmentpossible, and he believes that
those types of decisions couldbe made at a local level so that
individuals can vote for whatthey want or move to a state
that better aligns with theirideals.
(17:27):
That's why he says that's whyyou saw a large migration from
california to texas during covid.
Now I laid out my argument,which I've kind of do all the
time as economic existentialists, that the size of the federal
government, a local government,is irrelevant because
politicians are bought by thedonor class.
(17:49):
Most donors are business peopleand they are buying is a way to
manipulate the workforce.
Deregulation is not going to gofrom the federal government to
the states.
The large amount of powercorporations have for
politicians will actually makesure that those regulations
don't see the light of day whenit comes to local government.
(18:12):
60 years of labor history hasshown that corporations on its
own will not do right by theconsumer, nor by the customer.
They will knowingly poison yourfood, they will knowingly
poison your water.
They will knowingly go to war,to false pretenses, to make
money.
It is not about the governmentin and of itself.
(18:33):
It's about the government thathas been taken over by corporate
power and a company is theleast democratic place that
exists.
By design, corporations do whatthey are allowed to do, because
the united states system isnothing more than organized
bribery and there is nopolitical answer for that
(18:55):
problem.
I said as well that I think that, uh, he labored under the
assumption that localpoliticians make decisions, when
what actually happens ispoliticians listen to people who
pay them and not the people whovote for them.
The regulation has always beena scam.
Business people use to makeworking places less safe, while
(19:18):
making sure workers have norecourse to complain.
Of course, billionaires wantsmall government, because the
smaller it is, the easier it isfor them to gain monopoly power.
Smaller it is, the easier it isfor them to gain monopoly power
.
So you know then, I got the.
Well, it's great that Trump isnot a politician, so at least
(19:38):
we'll have a reprieve for fouryears.
Hopefully we can both agree onthat, and I kind of said I know
that is a line that people havebeen saying for a while about
president trump, but once trumpleft the trump organization and
ran for president, he became apolitician.
(20:00):
The president of the unitedstates is a political position
and trump has shown zerointerest in stopping the
corporate takeover of thecountry.
If anything, trump will be morelikely to accelerate the
problem because Trump surroundshimself with millionaires and
billionaires.
Most of them are just going tomake America more technocratic
(20:22):
than it already is.
They aren't hanging aroundTrump because they like him.
They are hanging around Trumpbecause they are trying to
extract something from him fortheir individual business
interests.
So Will then asked me, or saidthat he's, you know, postulated
that he's sure that they don'tcare about the US.
(20:44):
It's just a bunch ofmillionaires and billionaires
spending 20 plus hours a dayworking when they could be
easily living on a golf course.
Some people just have to hate.
I've seen so many great thingsin the past few weeks.
Now, when I told him it's notabout hate or being mad, it's
about the fact thatmultinational corporations have
(21:05):
no loyalty to a country, dollarshave no loyalty to a country,
have no loyalty to a country.
Dollars have no loyalty to acountry, and that even trump
advisor steve bannon has saidthat elon musk is in the tank
for the chinese communistgovernment.
Now.
Elon literally killed aprovision.
We know this.
He killed the provision in thebill because it put regulations
on chinese chips that would haveaffected Tesla's manufacturing.
(21:30):
I accused him of thinking waytoo small and I said you have to
think about globalization andthe continued destruction of the
American workforce and that ifyou think, because the
government is small, it'll solveall of life's problems and all
the problems are going to goaway.
That is a bit naive.
You will either be ruled by thegovernment or you'll be ruled
(21:55):
by corporate power.
The people in DC are there.
The billionaires that showed upare not there because they're
good people that love America.
They are there because they'retrying to curry favor with the
people in power for their ownbusiness interests.
So of course he asked me whoshould we send to DC?
(22:20):
And I told him what I probablyhave told you before that I
believe DC is fundamentallybroken and unreformable and at
this point I think the governorfor each individual state should
be the representative for thatstate.
In the District of Columbia,uncle Roro, uncle Roland Martin,
(22:42):
went viral as he had a messagefor black Americans, short but
poignant and stark stark.
I'll just say that.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
MJ and LeBron debates on who's the goat.
There is literally, as we speak, an entire focus to gut every
single civil right and economicgain that we have had since 1964
(23:24):
, because they are pissed withthose three acts.
They're pissed with the Brownsboard of education act.
You have voucher bills that arebeing pushed in texas and
tennessee and other places togut public education.
What we have to understand isthere is a vicious assault to
completely defund black america.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
Uh, a very stark warning from roland martin, from
Roland Martin Live, somethingthat we should think about
Strange bedfellows when it comesto politics.
Because there was a billintroduced by Republican Senator
Josh Hawley and DemocraticSocialist Senator Bernie Sanders
(24:13):
.
Senator Sanders and Hawleyintroduced legislation to cap
credit card interest at 10%.
So Senator Sanders, theindependent from Vermont, Josh
Hawley, the Republican fromMontana, introduced a bipartisan
(24:34):
legislation aimed at cappingcredit card interest rates at 10
percent.
Now this initiative comes inresponse to the financial
struggles faced by many workingclass families aimed at rising
costs for essential goods likegroceries, gas and rent.
The bill seeks to alleviate theburden of high interest rates,
(24:55):
which have been a long-standingissue for consumers.
So I'm going to say this, andmaybe I'll do more on this on
the next episode but the useconomy has outperformed most of
his rivals in terms of uhproductivity and might and
innovation, but the success hasnot led to rapidly rising living
(25:18):
standards for most americans.
By many other measures, thewell-being of us affairs worse
than many other rich countriesand has fallen further behind
since the 1990, and that is inlife expectancy, prevalence of
depression, income inequalityand life satisfaction.
Now, when it is, it ischallenging, you know, to
(25:43):
promote the benefits of biggovernment with individuals lack
the financial safety net, suchas a $500 for emergencies, and
62% of Americans rely onpaycheck to paycheck for a
living.
To further foster the trust inthe United States government,
(26:05):
you're going to have to delivertangible results and if you
don't, you will fall into thehands of some of these
technocrats, autocrats,kleptocrats, etc.
When playing the game Monopoly,it was intended to illustrate
(26:27):
that when people end up owningeverything normally a monopoly
of one person they inevitablyprice everyone out.
So I personally fail tocomprehend why individuals who
grew up playing this gamebelieve that billionaires
purchasing governmentalinfluence will have a favorable
(26:47):
outcome for them.
Governmental influence willhave a favorable outcome for
them.
It was the late presidentFranklin Delano Roosevelt who
said you will either have agovernment by organized money or
by organized mob.
And that has been my, mybiggest critique of why people
(27:18):
fall for these types of things.
You can't get people to believethe government is working and
everything is efficient andeverything is great when they
don't have a pot to piss in or awindow to throw it out of.
Speaker 4 (27:36):
For years now, you have had an administration which
, instead of pulling its thumbs,has rolled up its sleeves, and
I can assure you that we willkeep our sleeves rolled up of
(28:10):
peace, business and financialmonopoly, speculation, reckless
banking class antagonism,sectionalism, war, profiteering.
They had begun to consider thegovernment of the United States
as a mere appendage to their ownaffairs, and we know now that
(28:34):
government by organized money isjust as dangerous as government
by organized mob.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
I think that's a lesson that has been lost on us
Government with organized moneyis as dangerous as government
with an organized mob.
This goes back to what I wastelling my dear friend Will,
that when these billionairesshow up to DC and when these
billionaires and millionairesgive money to politicians,
(29:08):
they're not doing it becausethey're altruistic, because
there's some humble billionaireswho care about the well-being
of the country.
They're doing it becausethey're trying to extract
something from the federalgovernment, and normally what
they are trying to extract arefavorable business practices
that usually end up screwingover the American workers.
Speaker 4 (29:41):
Never before in all our history have these forces
been so united against onecandidate as they stand today.
They are unanimous in theirhate for me, and I welcome their
hatred, thank you.
I should like to have it saidof my first administration that,
(30:42):
in it, the forces ofselfishness and of lust for
power met their match.
I should like to have it saidWait a minute.
I should like to have it saidwait a minute.
I should like to have it saidof my second administration that
, in it, these forces met theirmaster.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
But the way the United States government works
we have opposition parties,george Washington didn't agree
with it, etc.
But while the Democrats are indisarray and it seems like the
(31:35):
Republican Party, at least atthis point, has decided to give
away the country to their chosenbillionaire, elon the
Democratic Party is going tohave to pull back the spirit of
what made them the party of theworking class, or they were the
party of the working class.
(31:56):
They're going to have toabandon neoliberalism.
They're going to have toabandon the technocratic.
We have the good billionaireslet's bring out Warren Buffett,
let's bring out Mark Cuban andthey're going to have to get
back to the economic populism ofan FDR.
And that's where the real fightis going to happen.
(32:20):
All of American internationaldebate is a debate between
Eisenhower and let's just say,we'll say Reagan, somebody who
said don't get involved in theseforeign affairs, don't get
(32:43):
enrolled, be afraid of themilitary industrial complex, as
important as that is.
I'll also say the mostimportant continuous debate in
America is debate between Reaganand FDR.
Are we the era of biggovernment?
(33:05):
Are we the era of smallgovernment?
Speaker 3 (33:12):
If you're going to be the era of big government, as a
lot of the Democratic Partywants to be you need to be the
big government era of FDR handsand dump it on our military and
(33:32):
senators and representativesfailure to challenge him.
This is how kingdoms operate,rule by decree.
It proves that we're asking thewrong question.
Plug can American democracysurvive Trump?
Into a search engine and you'llfind thousands of websites,
blogs, articles, podcastsdevoted to that one single
question.
But American democracy waskneecapped by five Republicans
on the Supreme Court years agowhen they ruled that money was
the same thing as free speech,the corporations were persons
(33:55):
with rights under the Bill ofHuman Rights and that political
operatives could engage invirtually unlimited purges of
voting rolls, accompanied byracially and gender-targeted
laws to make it harder to vote.
The correct question is can theAmerican system, now that it's
become flooded with dark moneyand the right to vote has become
a mere privilege in red states,ever again represent the
interests of average citizens?
Can we ever return to democracy?
In an open call on Axe yesterdaywith Republican senators Joni
(34:17):
Ernst and Mike Lee, apartheidbillionaire Elon Musk, whose
father says he was chauffeuredto school in a white-run South
Africa in a Rolls Royce, litinto the regulations that
created and protect the Americanmiddle class and our democracy.
Regulations, he said basicallyshould be default gone.
No default there, default gone.
And if it turns out that wemissed the mark on a regulation,
we can always add it back in.
And then, in a childlike echoof Ayn Rand, musk added these
regulations are addedwilly-nilly all the time, so we
(34:38):
just do a wholesale springcleaning of regulation and get
the government off the backs ofeveryday Americans so people can
get things done.
If the government has millionsof regulations holding everyone
back, well, it's not freedom.
We've got to restore freedom.
End quote.
Both capitalism and democracycould be likened to, ideally
played to benefit the largestnumber of people by creating and
guaranteeing life, liberty andthe pursuit of happiness.
But imagine if the NFL were tosuspend their regulations just
(34:58):
before this Sunday's Super Bowland the Chiefs, like most
elected Democrats, chose tocontinue playing by the old
regulations.
But the Eagles, after givingcash bribes to the refs to keep
quiet, started gut-punching,face-mask-pulling and even threw
five extra players out of thefield.
The only team that would everwin would be the one most
willing to play dirty or buy offthe refs.
And increasingly that's wherewe are today, both with our
democracy and our economy.
(35:20):
Every state in the union has putinto place an agency to
regulate insurance companiesbecause that very industry has a
long horrible history ofripping people off and refusing
to pay claims unless the powerof the state is invoked against
them.
The same reason when wederegulated them in the 1920s
and the late 1990s, the resultwas huge rip-offs that produced
the Republican Great Depressionand the Bush crash of 2008.
We regulate automobilemanufacturers because they have
a history of putting profitsover the lives of their
customers before Pinto, 900 dead.
(35:41):
Gm trucks, 2,000 dead, etc.
We regulate refineries becausetheir emissions cause cancer and
asthma.
We regulate drugs becauseunscrupulous manufacturers
killed people in previous eras.
Workplace safety after theTriangle shirt waste fire killed
146 young women voting becausecorrupt politicians rigged
elections.
We regulate traffic with signsand stoplights to keep order and
reduce accidents.
We regulate police to preventthem from abusing innocent
people.
We regulate building codes sopeople's homes don't collapse or
catch on fire from faulty cheapwiring.
(36:02):
And there was a time in Americawhen we regulated money and
politics and guaranteed theright to vote.
Those two types of regulationswere passed in the late 19th and
early 20th centuries aftermultiple scandals, like in 1899
when William Cooper, now thenation's second richest man,
openly bribed Montanalegislators by standing outside
the legislative chamber passingout brand new thousand dollar
bills to the men who voted hisway, or when, state after state,
most all former Confederatestates repeatedly refused to
allow black people to vote.
(36:23):
We passed regulationsguaranteeing a minimum wage,
unemployment insurance and theright to unionize to create the
world's first large-scale middleclass.
And we regulated the morbidlyrich with a 90% income tax rate
to prevent them from amassing somuch wealth that their
financial power could become athreat to our democratic
republic.
And of course, it's thoseregulations, money and politics,
the right to vote andpreventing the accumulation of
dangerous levels of wealth towhich today's prologuarchs most
strenuously object.
(36:45):
In each case, it was fiverepublicans on the us supreme
court who gutted our protectiveregulations and put america on a
direct collision course withtoday's oligarchic, neo-fascist
takeover.
They ruled that billionairescould buy politicians, because
giving money in exchange forvotes isn't bribery but merely
an expression of FirstAmendment-protected free speech.
They claimed that corporationsaren't soulless creations of the
law but are persons with thesame right to share their free
speech with politicians who dotheir bidding.
And they ruled that voting isnot a right in America, an open
(37:07):
defiance of US law, but a mereprivilege.
No-transcript responsive to thevoters was in the 1960s, when
Medicare, medicaid and foodstamps were created and the
Civil Rights and Voting RightsActs were passed, and in the
early 70s, when we outlawed bigmoney in politics.
(37:28):
Then in 1978, five Republicanson the Supreme Court ruled in
the Malati decision, written byLewis Powell himself, that
corporations are persons andmoney is merely free speech.
Two years later, reagan floatedinto the White House on a river
of oil money and systematicallybegan gutting the protective
regulations that had built thelargest and most successful
middle class the world had everseen.
Since then, big money has frozenus like a mosquito in amber.
Even Obama's big effort toestablish a national health care
(37:49):
system with an option forMedicare had to kneel before the
throne of right-wingbillionaires in the insurance
industry.
Every developed country in theworld has some variation on a
free or low-cost national healthcare system and free or even
subsidized higher education.
In most developed countries,homelessness is not a crisis.
Nobody goes bankrupt becausesomebody in their family got
sick and jobs pay well enoughand have union pensions.
So people can retire after 30or 40 years in the workplace and
live comfortably for the restof their lives.
(38:09):
But not in America Since theReagan Revolution, right-wing
billionaires have blocked any ofthese things from happening
because they'd be paid for withtaxes, and there's nothing
right-wing billionaires hatemore than paying taxes.
Dark money has destroyed thenotion of one person per vote.
Monopoly, allowed becausecorporations can now buy
politicians, has destroyed thesmall businesses that once
filled America's malls anddowntowns, and voter suppression
and voterless purges handed the2024 election to Trump, as
reporter Greg Palast documentedin a recent shocking report.
(38:30):
So yeah, let's do away with allthe regulations, like wannabe
kings Elon and Donald say, andmake the United States look and
operate more like Somalia andits failed state relatives than
anything Americans wouldrecognize After all, freedom.
The many questions surrounding Musk's efforts and
Doge's efforts.
De facto closing of USAID isamong Trump's administration
moves that test legal boundariestook office.
Legal observers were skepticalof his plans for an Elon
(00:26):
Musk-led Department ofGovernment Efficiency to
unilaterally shrink the size ofthe federal bureaucracy.
Questions have grown in theweeks since he has been back in
the White House and reached anew flashpoint with the
administration de facto shutdownof US agencies for
(00:47):
international development.
So a rundown of severalquestions that issues that are
in play Can the administrationeffectively shut down USAID or
USAID or USAID Now?
Usaid has carried out a foreignassistance program since 1961,
(01:12):
and Congress in 1998 establishedit as an independent agency,
though closely intertwined withthe State Department.
It is highly unlikely thatTrump and Musk can formally wipe
out the agency by merging itinto the State Department
without legislative approval.
What happened in recent days isshort of what leaves some of
(01:35):
the administration's moves in agray area.
The agency headquarters wasclosed on Monday and many of its
functions and communicationswere crippled.
Doge officials sought access tothe agency system over the
weekend.
Now the Trump administrationsees USID as a place to start
what they can, basically to seewhat they can do and who will
(02:01):
stop them do and who will stopthem Now?
That came from MatthewKavanaugh, who is a director of
the Center of Global HealthPolicy and Politics at
Georgetown University.
Now USAID works heavily withgovernment contractors and the
administration has moreflexibility in dealing with them
than government employees.
It also has some wiggle room topause spending and put workers
(02:25):
on temporary leaves.
But the wholesale refusal byTrump to spend agencies' foreign
aid funds would run along intothe Nixon-era federal law known
as the Empowered Control Act of1974, which requires the
president to get permission fromCongress to withhold any
(02:47):
discretionary spending.
So Brian Riddle, a formerRepublican Senate aide now at
the conservative leaningManhattan Institute, said he
thinks the president's US IDoverhaul has inventeda
constitutional crisis.
Quote the president can't takeback the funding, he said.
Some legal scholars say thepresident has more room to
(03:10):
control spending on mattersrelated to national security and
foreign affairs, and USpresidents, going back to Thomas
Jefferson, who halted fundingfor gunboats to patrol the
Mississippi River, haveimpounded and appropriated money
.
Trump's top lawyer at theOffice of Management and Budget
(03:33):
has argued that the 1974impoundment law
unconstitutionally limits thepresident's power to control and
manage the executive branch, soa court showdown on the issue
could be ahead.
Now, what is Doge's actualauthority and where did it come
from?
Now, trump created Doge throughan executive order he signed
(03:56):
the day he took office,establishing Musk's outfit as a
temporary governmentorganization.
The president did so byrenaming and reorganizing an
already existing office in theexecutive branch.
His order said Doge would helpimplement his agenda by
modernizing federal technologyand software and maximizing
(04:18):
government efficiency andproductivity.
He instructed agency heads tocooperate with Doge.
Productivity.
He instructed agency heads tocooperate with Doge, but said
the creation of a neworganization didn't supplant the
power of the executivedepartments or agencies Another
order said that Doge would havea role in reshaping the federal
workforce.
Now, questions remain about whoactually works for Doge, what
(04:41):
their roles and responsibilitiesare and how it's funded.
Now, before he took office,trump created the outfit as an
advisory panel.
Doge co-chair Vivek Ramaswamyhas left, as has Bill McGinley,
who Trump appointed as Doge'slegal counsel in December.
(05:02):
Now the White House on Mondaysaid Musk had classified a
special government employee, orwas classified as a special
government employee, whichenables him to work at the White
House for 130 days is about,without filing financial
disclosure forms required forregular White House employees.
But he also raises conflicts ofinterest questions because his
(05:25):
Doge work could benefit hisbusiness interests, including
Tesla and SpaceX.
The other question is can Trumpdeputize Doge to slash the
federal government?
Now, recent pastadministrations, including under
Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton,have established advisory
(05:46):
bodies aimed at cutting spendingor making the government more
effective, but their structuresand mandates were different in
character than Doge privatesector figures with a mandate to
drain the swamp in Washington.
The group known as the GraceCommission made more than 2,400
(06:09):
recommendations, includingproposals to rethink protections
for government workers.
Now, many of thoserecommendations were never
implemented.
Now Trump, by contrast, isworking closely with Musk to
engineer significant financialand structural changes in the
government over the matter ofweeks and months.
The effort also received anunusual law enforcement backing
(06:31):
Monday from the Trumpappointment interim US attorney
in Washington, ed Martin.
Ed Martin said I ask that youutilize me and my staff to
assist in protecting the Dogework and the Doge workers.
Martin wrote in a public letterto Musk.
(06:53):
Any threats, confrontation orother actions in any way that
impact their work may breaknumerous laws, may break
numerous laws.
Now, legal observers said Trumpwas generally on solid legal
ground in creating Doge andusing it to input.
So long as the must isfunctioning as an advisor and
(07:13):
not as an actual decision maker,there isn't a problem with the
president getting advice frompeople outside of the government
, said the University ofVirginia law professor Shartish
Prakash, who studies executivepowers and the president, and he
said the president can directagencies to cooperate with that
(07:35):
advisor.
Prakash said that though therecould be privacy and national
security and computer accessrules that legally limit Musk
and Doge's access to information.
So what are the legalboundaries here that Doge is
testing?
Now?
Putting aside questions ofDoge's structure, some legal
(07:58):
experts say it could haveconduct that has so far violated
federal laws.
For example, acting on a Dogeproposal, the Office of Personal
and Management had offered adeferred resignation package to
about 2 million federalemployees, who were told that
(08:19):
they would be paid throughSeptember 30th of 2025 if they
agree to resign by February 6th.
Now this offer might haveviolated the Administrative
Leave Act of 2016, which limitshow federal employees can be put
on leave, said Nicholas Bender,a University of Minnesota law
(08:39):
professor.
Bender said another potentiallegal hurdle is the
Anti-Deficiency Act, a law thatsays the federal government
can't promise to spend money inexcess of what Congress has made
available.
So Congress has actually onlyfunded the government through
March.
So the offer to pay salariesthrough September appears to
(09:02):
violate this statute throughSeptember appears to violate
this statute, bender said.
On Monday, a coalition of laborunions sued the Treasury
Department, alleging he hadunlawfully given Doge access to
payment systems with thepersonal financial data of about
millions of Americans.
The plaintiffs said they wereseeking a court order to halt
systemic and continuous andongoing violations of federal
(09:25):
laws that protect the privacy ofpersonal information contained
in federal records.
That imposes transparencyrequirements on advisory
committees to the executivebranch, including that they meet
(09:47):
in public and have a fair andbalanced viewpoints
representative.
So, now that Trump has formallymade Doge part of the
government, some legal expertshave said that those cases may
no longer be relevant.
Cases may no longer be relevant, but Keel McClellan, a lawyer
(10:09):
who brought on the cases, saidthat the litigation is still
100% valid and to a courtdetermines that every single
person purporting to work forDoge is actually an employee of
the government entity describedin President Trump's executive
order.
So, as the opposition party,the Democrats are somewhat in
(10:29):
disarray, but the Senator fromMassachusetts, senator Elizabeth
Borman, said this.
Let's be clear about what'shappening right now.
The Trump administration hasallowed Elon Musk, an unelected
(10:51):
billionaire, along with anunknown number of his
unqualified flunkies, to accessa critical federal payment
system and illegally shut downgovernment funding for certain
department and programs.
The system that he is nowcontrolling is the same system
(11:13):
that Americans rely on toreceive Social Security payments
, medicare support, federalsalaries, government contract
grants and tax refunds.
This filing session.
What happens now?
Maybe you get paid, maybe youdon't.
It all depends on what ElonMusk thinks.
(11:34):
He can now turn on funding forhis friends and turn off funding
for anyone he doesn't like.
Now, as long as Musk has access, he can retrieve people's
sensitive personal informationsocial security numbers, bank
account numbers, tax returns.
(11:55):
Musk now has the power toextract the information for his
own use, to boost his financesor strengthen his political
power, to say the least, this isan extraordinarily dangerous
situation.
I'm working to get specificanswers from Donald Trump's new
(12:18):
Treasury Secretary on why Muskwas given access to this
information, and I have calledthe Secretary to lay out what
safeguards are in place toprotect the people's privacy and
economic security of theAmerican people On Twitter or X
or whatever Musk wants us tocall it.
(12:39):
I made the point to say that noone elected his hand-picked
Twitter CEO wasn't happy to hearthat.
She wrote back to me.
Actually, over 77 millionpeople for exactly that.
Actually, no, and I can'tbelieve I have to say this, but
(13:00):
over 77 million people did notvote for Elon Musk.
Over 77 million people votedfor Donald Trump.
Over 75 million people votedfor Kamala Harris.
Elon Musk was not on the ballot.
Elon Musk did not win a singleelectoral vote.
(13:21):
Elon Musk did not win anelection.
Elon Musk has not been confirmedby the US Senate to a position
in the administration and theConstitution doesn't give him
power any power to cut offfunding that Congress has
approved.
He is in this position becausehe spent more than $290 million
(13:41):
on the 2024 election and boughthim an opportunity to be the
co-president with Trump.
This situation is alarming.
When unelected billionairesstart ransacking our government
offices, we cannot act asbusiness as usual.
We are living in a nightmarecreated by Trump and Musk and we
(14:02):
need to wake up to do something.
I'll keep ringing every alarmbell I can and continue to do
everything in my power to getthis under control.
Now I had a conversation todayon the Darrell McLean Instagram
page, which I do post things onthere and I respond when people
(14:25):
respond to me.
So there was a Republican thatintroduced a bill to abolish the
Occupational Safety and HealthyAdministration, the federal
agency that is dedicated toprotecting the American workers'
safety and health workerssafety and health.
(14:53):
Now Tesla is a 4% of USmanufacturing, yet they made up
75% of OSHA violations.
So the postulation is that thiswas something to do with Elon.
Tesla has had three times asmany OSHA violations as the
largest US plants combined, andthat was way back in 2019, you
(15:17):
know when Tesla started gettingthose violations.
So somebody replied to mepublicly and said that it was
all about his name as well, andhe said this was just saying
that this should be handled atthe state level.
Now I because I'm a disgruntledex-Republican yada, yada, yada.
(15:40):
I told him that that was codefor, for it actually won't be
handled at all becausebillionaires buy the government
and they'll buy the stategovernment just like they bought
the federal government that Ihave seen this book play out
(16:01):
before.
If, for reference, take a lookat uh, kent McConnell and how he
destroyed the state of Kentuckyand why it has been one of the
poorest states as MitchMcConnell took charge, I went on
to say that I don't have asmuch faith in politicians and as
(16:24):
in billionaires, and this isabout cheap labor and cheap
unprotected labor as well.
Now, if you want to learn aboutmitch mcconnell and what he did
to kentucky, I suggest a bookthat I read called mitch please
how mitch mcconnell sold outkentucky and american.
(16:46):
Two by matt jones with christallman Sold Out Kentucky in
America.
2 by Matt Jones with ChrisTallman, the founder of Kentucky
Sports Radio, and it was aneye-opening book, very good read
, and the book was called MitchPlease.
Now Will responded to me andsaid he actually doesn't trust
(17:06):
politicians and that's why he'sfor limited government,
especially the federalgovernment, and he's for the
smallest federal governmentpossible, and he believes that
those types of decisions couldbe made at a local level so that
individuals can vote for whatthey want or move to a state
that better aligns with theirideals.
(17:27):
That's why he says that's whyyou saw a large migration from
california to texas during covid.
Now I laid out my argument,which I've kind of do all the
time as economic existentialists, that the size of the federal
government, a local government,is irrelevant because
politicians are bought by thedonor class.
(17:49):
Most donors are business peopleand they are buying is a way to
manipulate the workforce.
Deregulation is not going to gofrom the federal government to
the states.
The large amount of powercorporations have for
politicians will actually makesure that those regulations
don't see the light of day whenit comes to local government.
(18:12):
60 years of labor history hasshown that corporations on its
own will not do right by theconsumer, nor by the customer.
They will knowingly poison yourfood, they will knowingly
poison your water.
They will knowingly go to war,to false pretenses, to make
money.
It is not about the governmentin and of itself.
(18:33):
It's about the government thathas been taken over by corporate
power and a company is theleast democratic place that
exists.
By design, corporations do whatthey are allowed to do, because
the united states system isnothing more than organized
bribery and there is nopolitical answer for that
(18:55):
problem.
I said as well that I think that, uh, he labored under the
assumption that localpoliticians make decisions, when
what actually happens ispoliticians listen to people who
pay them and not the people whovote for them.
The regulation has always beena scam.
Business people use to makeworking places less safe, while
(19:18):
making sure workers have norecourse to complain.
Of course, billionaires wantsmall government, because the
smaller it is, the easier it isfor them to gain monopoly power.
Smaller it is, the easier it isfor them to gain monopoly power
.
So you know then, I got the.
Well, it's great that Trump isnot a politician, so at least
(19:38):
we'll have a reprieve for fouryears.
Hopefully we can both agree onthat, and I kind of said I know
that is a line that people havebeen saying for a while about
president trump, but once trumpleft the trump organization and
ran for president, he became apolitician.
(20:00):
The president of the unitedstates is a political position
and trump has shown zerointerest in stopping the
corporate takeover of thecountry.
If anything, trump will be morelikely to accelerate the
problem because Trump surroundshimself with millionaires and
billionaires.
Most of them are just going tomake America more technocratic
(20:22):
than it already is.
They aren't hanging aroundTrump because they like him.
They are hanging around Trumpbecause they are trying to
extract something from him fortheir individual business
interests.
So Will then asked me, or saidthat he's, you know, postulated
that he's sure that they don'tcare about the US.
(20:44):
It's just a bunch ofmillionaires and billionaires
spending 20 plus hours a dayworking when they could be
easily living on a golf course.
Some people just have to hate.
I've seen so many great thingsin the past few weeks.
Now, when I told him it's notabout hate or being mad, it's
about the fact thatmultinational corporations have
(21:05):
no loyalty to a country, dollarshave no loyalty to a country,
have no loyalty to a country.
Dollars have no loyalty to acountry, and that even trump
advisor steve bannon has saidthat elon musk is in the tank
for the chinese communistgovernment.
Now.
Elon literally killed aprovision.
We know this.
He killed the provision in thebill because it put regulations
on chinese chips that would haveaffected Tesla's manufacturing.
(21:30):
I accused him of thinking waytoo small and I said you have to
think about globalization andthe continued destruction of the
American workforce and that ifyou think, because the
government is small, it'll solveall of life's problems and all
the problems are going to goaway.
That is a bit naive.
You will either be ruled by thegovernment or you'll be ruled
(21:55):
by corporate power.
The people in DC are there.
The billionaires that showed upare not there because they're
good people that love America.
They are there because they'retrying to curry favor with the
people in power for their ownbusiness interests.
So of course he asked me whoshould we send to DC?
(22:20):
And I told him what I probablyhave told you before that I
believe DC is fundamentallybroken and unreformable and at
this point I think the governorfor each individual state should
be the representative for thatstate.
In the District of Columbia,uncle Roro, uncle Roland Martin,
(22:42):
went viral as he had a messagefor black Americans, short but
poignant and stark stark.
I'll just say that.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
MJ and LeBron debates on who's the goat.
There is literally, as we speak, an entire focus to gut every
single civil right and economicgain that we have had since 1964
(23:24):
, because they are pissed withthose three acts.
They're pissed with the Brownsboard of education act.
You have voucher bills that arebeing pushed in texas and
tennessee and other places togut public education.
What we have to understand isthere is a vicious assault to
completely defund black america.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
Uh, a very stark warning from roland martin, from
Roland Martin Live, somethingthat we should think about
Strange bedfellows when it comesto politics.
Because there was a billintroduced by Republican Senator
Josh Hawley and DemocraticSocialist Senator Bernie Sanders
(24:13):
.
Senator Sanders and Hawleyintroduced legislation to cap
credit card interest at 10%.
So Senator Sanders, theindependent from Vermont, Josh
Hawley, the Republican fromMontana, introduced a bipartisan
(24:34):
legislation aimed at cappingcredit card interest rates at 10
percent.
Now this initiative comes inresponse to the financial
struggles faced by many workingclass families aimed at rising
costs for essential goods likegroceries, gas and rent.
The bill seeks to alleviate theburden of high interest rates,
(24:55):
which have been a long-standingissue for consumers.
So I'm going to say this, andmaybe I'll do more on this on
the next episode but the useconomy has outperformed most of
his rivals in terms of uhproductivity and might and
innovation, but the success hasnot led to rapidly rising living
(25:18):
standards for most americans.
By many other measures, thewell-being of us affairs worse
than many other rich countriesand has fallen further behind
since the 1990, and that is inlife expectancy, prevalence of
depression, income inequalityand life satisfaction.
Now, when it is, it ischallenging, you know, to
(25:43):
promote the benefits of biggovernment with individuals lack
the financial safety net, suchas a $500 for emergencies, and
62% of Americans rely onpaycheck to paycheck for a
living.
To further foster the trust inthe United States government,
(26:05):
you're going to have to delivertangible results and if you
don't, you will fall into thehands of some of these
technocrats, autocrats,kleptocrats, etc.
When playing the game Monopoly,it was intended to illustrate
(26:27):
that when people end up owningeverything normally a monopoly
of one person they inevitablyprice everyone out.
So I personally fail tocomprehend why individuals who
grew up playing this gamebelieve that billionaires
purchasing governmentalinfluence will have a favorable
(26:47):
outcome for them.
Governmental influence willhave a favorable outcome for
them.
It was the late presidentFranklin Delano Roosevelt who
said you will either have agovernment by organized money or
by organized mob.
And that has been my, mybiggest critique of why people
(27:18):
fall for these types of things.
You can't get people to believethe government is working and
everything is efficient andeverything is great when they
don't have a pot to piss in or awindow to throw it out of.
Speaker 4 (27:36):
For years now, you have had an administration which
, instead of pulling its thumbs,has rolled up its sleeves, and
I can assure you that we willkeep our sleeves rolled up of
(28:10):
peace, business and financialmonopoly, speculation, reckless
banking class antagonism,sectionalism, war, profiteering.
They had begun to consider thegovernment of the United States
as a mere appendage to their ownaffairs, and we know now that
(28:34):
government by organized money isjust as dangerous as government
by organized mob.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
I think that's a lesson that has been lost on us
Government with organized moneyis as dangerous as government
with an organized mob.
This goes back to what I wastelling my dear friend Will,
that when these billionairesshow up to DC and when these
billionaires and millionairesgive money to politicians,
(29:08):
they're not doing it becausethey're altruistic, because
there's some humble billionaireswho care about the well-being
of the country.
They're doing it becausethey're trying to extract
something from the federalgovernment, and normally what
they are trying to extract arefavorable business practices
that usually end up screwingover the American workers.
Speaker 4 (29:41):
Never before in all our history have these forces
been so united against onecandidate as they stand today.
They are unanimous in theirhate for me, and I welcome their
hatred, thank you.
I should like to have it saidof my first administration that,
(30:42):
in it, the forces ofselfishness and of lust for
power met their match.
I should like to have it saidWait a minute.
I should like to have it saidwait a minute.
I should like to have it saidof my second administration that
, in it, these forces met theirmaster.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
But the way the United States government works
we have opposition parties,george Washington didn't agree
with it, etc.
But while the Democrats are indisarray and it seems like the
(31:35):
Republican Party, at least atthis point, has decided to give
away the country to their chosenbillionaire, elon the
Democratic Party is going tohave to pull back the spirit of
what made them the party of theworking class, or they were the
party of the working class.
(31:56):
They're going to have toabandon neoliberalism.
They're going to have toabandon the technocratic.
We have the good billionaireslet's bring out Warren Buffett,
let's bring out Mark Cuban andthey're going to have to get
back to the economic populism ofan FDR.
And that's where the real fightis going to happen.
(32:20):
All of American internationaldebate is a debate between
Eisenhower and let's just say,we'll say Reagan, somebody who
said don't get involved in theseforeign affairs, don't get
(32:43):
enrolled, be afraid of themilitary industrial complex, as
important as that is.
I'll also say the mostimportant continuous debate in
America is debate between Reaganand FDR.
Are we the era of biggovernment?
(33:05):
Are we the era of smallgovernment?
Speaker 3 (33:12):
If you're going to be the era of big government, as a
lot of the Democratic Partywants to be you need to be the
big government era of FDR handsand dump it on our military and
(33:32):
senators and representativesfailure to challenge him.
This is how kingdoms operate,rule by decree.
It proves that we're asking thewrong question.
Plug can American democracysurvive Trump?
Into a search engine and you'llfind thousands of websites,
blogs, articles, podcastsdevoted to that one single
question.
But American democracy waskneecapped by five Republicans
on the Supreme Court years agowhen they ruled that money was
the same thing as free speech,the corporations were persons
(33:55):
with rights under the Bill ofHuman Rights and that political
operatives could engage invirtually unlimited purges of
voting rolls, accompanied byracially and gender-targeted
laws to make it harder to vote.
The correct question is can theAmerican system, now that it's
become flooded with dark moneyand the right to vote has become
a mere privilege in red states,ever again represent the
interests of average citizens?
Can we ever return to democracy?
In an open call on Axe yesterdaywith Republican senators Joni
(34:17):
Ernst and Mike Lee, apartheidbillionaire Elon Musk, whose
father says he was chauffeuredto school in a white-run South
Africa in a Rolls Royce, litinto the regulations that
created and protect the Americanmiddle class and our democracy.
Regulations, he said basicallyshould be default gone.
No default there, default gone.
And if it turns out that wemissed the mark on a regulation,
we can always add it back in.
And then, in a childlike echoof Ayn Rand, musk added these
regulations are addedwilly-nilly all the time, so we
(34:38):
just do a wholesale springcleaning of regulation and get
the government off the backs ofeveryday Americans so people can
get things done.
If the government has millionsof regulations holding everyone
back, well, it's not freedom.
We've got to restore freedom.
End quote.
Both capitalism and democracycould be likened to, ideally
played to benefit the largestnumber of people by creating and
guaranteeing life, liberty andthe pursuit of happiness.
But imagine if the NFL were tosuspend their regulations just
(34:58):
before this Sunday's Super Bowland the Chiefs, like most
elected Democrats, chose tocontinue playing by the old
regulations.
But the Eagles, after givingcash bribes to the refs to keep
quiet, started gut-punching,face-mask-pulling and even threw
five extra players out of thefield.
The only team that would everwin would be the one most
willing to play dirty or buy offthe refs.
And increasingly that's wherewe are today, both with our
democracy and our economy.
(35:20):
Every state in the union has putinto place an agency to
regulate insurance companiesbecause that very industry has a
long horrible history ofripping people off and refusing
to pay claims unless the powerof the state is invoked against
them.
The same reason when wederegulated them in the 1920s
and the late 1990s, the resultwas huge rip-offs that produced
the Republican Great Depressionand the Bush crash of 2008.
We regulate automobilemanufacturers because they have
a history of putting profitsover the lives of their
customers before Pinto, 900 dead.
(35:41):
Gm trucks, 2,000 dead, etc.
We regulate refineries becausetheir emissions cause cancer and
asthma.
We regulate drugs becauseunscrupulous manufacturers
killed people in previous eras.
Workplace safety after theTriangle shirt waste fire killed
146 young women voting becausecorrupt politicians rigged
elections.
We regulate traffic with signsand stoplights to keep order and
reduce accidents.
We regulate police to preventthem from abusing innocent
people.
We regulate building codes sopeople's homes don't collapse or
catch on fire from faulty cheapwiring.
(36:02):
And there was a time in Americawhen we regulated money and
politics and guaranteed theright to vote.
Those two types of regulationswere passed in the late 19th and
early 20th centuries aftermultiple scandals, like in 1899
when William Cooper, now thenation's second richest man,
openly bribed Montanalegislators by standing outside
the legislative chamber passingout brand new thousand dollar
bills to the men who voted hisway, or when, state after state,
most all former Confederatestates repeatedly refused to
allow black people to vote.
(36:23):
We passed regulationsguaranteeing a minimum wage,
unemployment insurance and theright to unionize to create the
world's first large-scale middleclass.
And we regulated the morbidlyrich with a 90% income tax rate
to prevent them from amassing somuch wealth that their
financial power could become athreat to our democratic
republic.
And of course, it's thoseregulations, money and politics,
the right to vote andpreventing the accumulation of
dangerous levels of wealth towhich today's prologuarchs most
strenuously object.
(36:45):
In each case, it was fiverepublicans on the us supreme
court who gutted our protectiveregulations and put america on a
direct collision course withtoday's oligarchic, neo-fascist
takeover.
They ruled that billionairescould buy politicians, because
giving money in exchange forvotes isn't bribery but merely
an expression of FirstAmendment-protected free speech.
They claimed that corporationsaren't soulless creations of the
law but are persons with thesame right to share their free
speech with politicians who dotheir bidding.
And they ruled that voting isnot a right in America, an open
(37:07):
defiance of US law, but a mereprivilege.
No-transcript responsive to thevoters was in the 1960s, when
Medicare, medicaid and foodstamps were created and the
Civil Rights and Voting RightsActs were passed, and in the
early 70s, when we outlawed bigmoney in politics.
(37:28):
Then in 1978, five Republicanson the Supreme Court ruled in
the Malati decision, written byLewis Powell himself, that
corporations are persons andmoney is merely free speech.
Two years later, reagan floatedinto the White House on a river
of oil money and systematicallybegan gutting the protective
regulations that had built thelargest and most successful
middle class the world had everseen.
Since then, big money has frozenus like a mosquito in amber.
Even Obama's big effort toestablish a national health care
(37:49):
system with an option forMedicare had to kneel before the
throne of right-wingbillionaires in the insurance
industry.
Every developed country in theworld has some variation on a
free or low-cost national healthcare system and free or even
subsidized higher education.
In most developed countries,homelessness is not a crisis.
Nobody goes bankrupt becausesomebody in their family got
sick and jobs pay well enoughand have union pensions.
So people can retire after 30or 40 years in the workplace and
live comfortably for the restof their lives.
(38:09):
But not in America Since theReagan Revolution, right-wing
billionaires have blocked any ofthese things from happening
because they'd be paid for withtaxes, and there's nothing
right-wing billionaires hatemore than paying taxes.
Dark money has destroyed thenotion of one person per vote.
Monopoly, allowed becausecorporations can now buy
politicians, has destroyed thesmall businesses that once
filled America's malls anddowntowns, and voter suppression
and voterless purges handed the2024 election to Trump, as
reporter Greg Palast documentedin a recent shocking report.
(38:30):
So yeah, let's do away with allthe regulations, like wannabe
kings Elon and Donald say, andmake the United States look and
operate more like Somalia andits failed state relatives than
anything Americans wouldrecognize After all, freedom.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com