Beyond Elon Musk, several other tech billionaires hold significant influence over federal agencies regulating their businesses. Since Donald Trump’s presidency, over three dozen individuals associated with Musk, Peter Thiel, Marc Andreessen, and Palmer Luckey have taken on roles within these agencies, directing billions of dollars in contracts to their respective companies.

According to an analysis by the Wall Street Journal, companies owned, founded, or invested in by these four individuals have secured more than a dozen federal contracts worth approximately!$6 billion since Trump’s inauguration. Furthermore, they are actively pursuing additional contracts valued in the billions.

The appointments of these individuals to departments overseeing and regulating their businesses raise significant concerns. These placements could potentially violate conflict-of-interest laws or government ethics regulations, which prohibit federal employees from leveraging their positions for personal gain.

While it is not uncommon for trusted allies to be appointed to government positions, the scale and speed at which Musk’s network has infiltrated the government are unprecedented. Previously, TechCrunch reported on the numerous individuals from Musk’s circle who have joined him at DOGE, where he has dismantled federal agencies and reduced workforces in departments responsible for regulating his businesses. At least 19 other individuals with connections to Silicon Valley, including founders and investors, have also joined DOGE.

Daniel Weiner, director of the Brennan Center’s Elections and Government Program, noted that the second Trump administration is the first in recent years not to implement additional ethics safeguards for high-level appointees. Trump promptly fired the director of the Office of Government Ethics and 17 inspectors general who served as watchdogs for fraud and abuse upon taking office.

Weiner stated, “It certainly does potentially increase the risk that you have people working on matters that do impact, at least indirectly, their bottom lines.” However, he also acknowledged that this is a long-standing issue in the government that is not unique to the current administration.

Innovation versus accountability

It can be argued that it is logical for employees and associates of Musk, Thiel, Andreessen, and Luckey to join government agencies, as they are talented individuals behind cutting-edge technology that the government genuinely needs. They understand how to innovate quickly and compete globally.

However, more serious concerns arise when favoritism threatens to undermine competition, policy is created or destroyed to protect market dominance, or regulations that serve the public good are hindered to promote business interests.

For instance, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau recently retreated from pursuing rules that would restrict data brokers, despite growing privacy concerns – a shift that stands to benefit companies involved in AI, surveillance, and data analytics. Another example is DOGE’s firing of staffers at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration who investigate autonomous vehicle safety, including several probes into Tesla.

Weiner said, “One of the defining structural challenges the government of the United States has right now is that we have a system in which the very wealthiest interests have so much power to shape our elections and then turn around and shape government policy.”

Another Silicon Valley appointee, Mike Kratsios – a former Thiel employee – is now leading technology policy for the U.S. government. In an April speech, he spoke about eliminating bad regulations that “weigh down our innovators,” particularly those innovating in AI.

Weiner stated, “Many people in Silicon Valley tend to think that whatever worked in Silicon Valley is also going to work for administering the United States government.” He added, “And as we’re seeing now, the danger is a lot of people are going to get hurt because of the assumptions they make.”

Weiner continued, “The fact that you had a successful startup after five others failed doesn’t necessarily mean you know how to run the Social Security Administration.”

A network inside and a payoff outside

Source Link