President-elect Donald Trump’s billionaire ally Elon Musk played a key role this week in killing a bipartisan funding proposal that would have prevented a government shutdown, railing against the plan in a torrent of more than 100 X posts that included multiple false claims.
The X owner, an unelected figure, not only used his outsize influence on the platform to help sway Congress, he did so without regard for the facts and gave a preview of the role he could play in government over the next four years.
“Trump has got himself a handful with Musk,” John Mark Hansen, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago, said in an email. “Trump’s done this kind of thing before, blowing up a bill at the last minute. This time, though, it looks like he was afraid of Musk upstaging him. Now there’s a new social media bully in town, pushing the champion social media bully around.”
Hansen added: “We’ll see what Musk’s influence is when he runs up against reality — like when he proposes cutting off ‘wasteful’ spending for other people but not NASA contracts for Space-X.”
Musk’s objections to the 1,547-page omnibus bill included misinformation about congressional salaries, federal funding and public health preparedness, among other topics.
He alleged that the plan included a 40% raise for lawmakers. But the maximum pay increase possible through the proposal would have been 3.8%, according to the Congressional Research Service.
One way that members of Congress can receive a pay raise is through automatic adjustments that go into effect unless denied by law. Most members make $174,000 per a year after their last increase of 2.8% in 2009. Congressional leadership is the exception, with the Speaker of the House earning the most at $223,500 annually.
The rejected bill struck a section from a previous appropriations act that denied members of Congress this automatic pay raise. A maximum increase of 3.8% would have bumped their annual salary by about $6,600, to approximately $180,000 annually.
Musk also shared a post from another user that falsely claimed the bill provided $3 billion in funding for a potential new stadium for the NFL’s Washington Commanders, commenting: “This should not be funded by your tax dollars!”
The bill included a provision to transfer control of the land that houses RFK Stadium from the federal government to the District of Columbia. That transfer is necessary to pave the way for the Commanders to possibly build a new stadium in the franchise’s old home — though the team is still considering other locations.
However, no such funding is provided by the bill. It states, in fact, that the federal government “shall not be responsible for payment or any costs or expenses” that the District of Columbia incurs after the transfer is complete aside from responsibilities related to specific environmental issues.
District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser addressed false claims about the stadium’s funding on Thursday, calling them “frustrating.”
“It was stated that the C.R. contains $3 billion for a stadium,” she said at a press conference. “All wrong. There are no federal dollars related to the transfer of RFK and in fact, the legislation does not require or link at all to a stadium.
