When Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, it was clear that if he won the election the country would be getting a two-fer — Hillary Clinton would play a major role in a Clinton administration. Most people viewed that possibility negatively, and Bill won with only 43 percent of the popular vote. Today, it seems clear that voting for Donald Trump also gets the country a two-fer — Elon Musk will likely play a major role in a Trump administration. While some won’t like that, it’s one of the best reasons to vote for Trump.
The Trump-Musk bromance has grown, especially over the last several months. They have a lot in common, but there are also some important differences.
On the in-common list are: They’re both billionaires, though Musk is much richer; they’ve both been very successful businessmen; they both graduated from the University of Pennsylvania; they both generally aligned with the Democratic Party until it went too far left for them; and they both have eccentricities that defy and upset conventional norms, and yet they still appeal to and even inspire millions of Americans.
Among the important differences: Musk is a self-made success while Trump started out with a multi-million dollar bump from his father; after graduating, Musk went to the liberal West Coast while Trump stayed on the liberal East Coast, yet both later moved to low-tax, red states; Musk is a serial entrepreneur with wide-ranging interests while Trump has never strayed far from real estate and his self-promotion efforts; Trump is a life-long teetotaler while Musk reportedly parties regularly and partakes of a number of “enhancements.” And importantly, Trump is a “natural born citizen” under the Constitution, while Musk is a native of South Africa and a naturalized citizen and so can never be president.
Given their similarities and differences, strengths and weaknesses, and their healthy egos, a Trump-Musk relationship could be volatile. But there is reason to believe it could be complimentary and very beneficial to the country.
If he wins the election, Trump reportedly has suggested he would put Musk in charge of a government efficiency commission. That would be a great assignment for an outside-of-the-box innovator like Musk. Few things are more resistant to reform and efficiency than a massive, bloated, wasteful bureaucracy, which is what the U.S. government has become.
It’s hard to fathom how much taxpayer money could be saved by a thorough government housecleaning — what we might call “draining the swamp.” But the resistance from entrenched bureaucrats, who have come to think that the public exists to serve the bureaucracy rather than the other way around, will be brutal.
There are some 2.95 million federal workers — a number that has remained relatively flat for 30 years (with decennial exceptions when people are hired temporarily to help take the census). But it’s widely recognized that the government could perform its key functions with a lot fewer people, many of whom get paid a lot for not doing much of anything.
Remember when working for the government was considered a “public service” rather than a ticket to the good life? No longer. Zip Recruiter says that the average federal employee makes $106,462 a year. The combined salaries for a couple, both of whom work for the government (not uncommon in Washington), could easily put them well above the top 10 percent in household income. In addition, employee benefits are some of the best available.
The government could significantly downsize if Trump, through Musk’s efficiency efforts, were to eliminate unneeded agencies and employees, combine agencies where duties and responsibilities overlap and slash regulations and red tape, something Trump did in his first term and promises to do again.
But the entrenched and entitled bureaucracy, backed by progressives and the media, won’t stand for any effort to make the government more efficient, affordable and accountable.
It’s a big job that will take a big individual to make happen, and Musk is about as big as they come. As an innovator, Musk sees possibilities that most people don’t. With Tesla, SpaceX and Starlink, to name a few of his organizations, Musk found a private sector way to do something successfully that no one, including the government, had done successfully and efficiently.
Of course, government isn’t a business. But the government could be run more like a business with the right person in charge. Unproductive people could be removed, employee rolls trimmed, realistic budgets set and met, and innovative and more technologically advanced ways to perform the valid functions of government could be established. It’s hard to imagine a person better suited for that task than Elon Musk.