SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
government accountability office
Sanders Warns Musk's Call for $700 Billion in Cuts Is a 'Prelude' to Social Security Privatization
"Why do you lie so much about Social Security? To get people to lose faith in the system, and then you can give it over to Wall Street," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Mar 11, 2025
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders warned late Monday that billionaire Elon Musk's new call for up to $700 billion in cuts to mandatory federal spending is an alarming step in the direction of Social Security privatization, a longstanding—and deeply unpopular—goal of right-wing politicians and corporate-funded think tanks.
Musk, who is spearheading a large-scale assault on federal agencies and workers, told Fox Business host Larry Kudlow on Monday that "waste and fraud" in "entitlement spending"—a category that includes Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—is "the big one to eliminate," estimating that up to $700 billion could be cut from such programs.
It's not clear where Musk, who has lied repeatedly about Social Security in recent weeks, got the $700 billion figure. As Rolling Stone's Andrew Perez noted, "There is no expert on the planet who thinks there is $700 billion worth of annual fraud in America's safety net programs."
"Musk at one point in the interview cited a Government Accountability Office report which estimated that the government may lose between $233 billion and $521 billion annually to fraud, but that report covered the whole of the federal government—not just those programs," Perez wrote.
A 2024 report from the Social Security Administration's inspector general found that of the $8.6 trillion in Social Security benefits paid out between 2015 and 2022, roughly $71.8 billion was dispensed improperly—0.84% of the total.
"I think this is a prelude not only to cutting benefits, but to privatizing Social Security itself. I think that's in the back of their mind."
Musk also baselessly claimed that mandatory federal spending on programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is a "mechanism by which the Democrats attract and retain illegal immigrants, by essentially paying them to come here and then turning them into voters." (In reality, undocumented immigrants pay taxes that help finance Social Security and Medicare but cannot receive benefits from the programs.)
Sanders (I-Vt.) couldn't hide his disgust when he was asked during a CNN appearance to respond to Musk's remarks.
"Well, he has called Social Security a Ponzi scheme. They have already laid off 2,500 employees of the Social Security Administration," said Sanders. "If you ask me, I think this is a prelude not only to cutting benefits, but to privatizing Social Security itself. I think that's in the back of their mind."
"Why do you lie so much about Social Security? Why do you make it look like it's a broken, dysfunctional system?" Sanders asked. "The reason is to get people to lose faith in the system, and then you can give it over to Wall Street. That's my view."
Musk's latest attack on Social Security, a remarkably efficient program that has never missed a payment, came as his Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, has effectively taken over the Social Security Administration (SSA) and is pushing for massive cuts to the agency's staff and budget based on egregious lies.
"Appearing to misread a chart, for example, Musk said on social media in February that DOGE had identified payments to 'tens of millions' of deceased Americans—an incorrect assertion repeated by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt," The Washington Postreported last week.
Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees—a union engaged in a legal fight against the Trump administration's purge of the federal workforce—wrote Monday that Musk's latest comments show that he "doesn't just want to cut the SSA workforce."
"He wants to eliminate Social Security entirely," Kelley added.
Joel Payne, chief communications officer at MoveOn Civic Action, said in a statement Tuesday that "Elon Musk and the Trump-led Republican Party are promising exactly what they have been trying to do for years: gut Social Security."
"Republicans want to illegally fire tens of thousands of workers responsible for making sure American seniors get their Social Security and then let Musk take his chainsaw to our benefits," said Payne. "We won't let them do it. Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and Republicans need to keep their hands off our Social Security."
The progressive advocacy group Social Security Works sounded a similarly defiant note.
"Elon Musk is a conman and a criminal, born with an emerald mine instead of a moral compass," the group wrote on social media. "Of course he wants to destroy Social Security, because he can't get his tiny greedy fingers on it any other way. HELL NO!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
How Can Congressional Dems Fight Back Against Trump and Musk? Oversight
There are far too many tools at congressional Democrats’ disposal for them to throw up their hands and act as though nothing can be done.
Feb 28, 2025
Earlier this month, as Elon Musk and his DOGE agents were initiating their chaotic takeover of the federal government, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jefferies (D-N.Y.) was asked what Democrats could do to slow Musk down or win concession in budget negotiations. In response, Jeffries literally threw up his hands and posed his own now-infamous question: “What leverage do we have?”
It was a wildly out-of-touch answer.
For one thing, the self-pitying tone is out of step with public opinion—Democratic voters and activists have been demanding more fight from their representatives. They want fewer (in fact, zero) Democratic Senators voting to confirm Trump nominees, and more spine in budget negotiation to get the simple concession of “no more unconstitutional impoundment of the funds we appropriate.” Fewer instances of Democratic representatives folding under the corrupting influence of crypto campaign cash to support industry-backed bills. More visiting and amplifying the voices of the people most harmed by DOGE’s cuts and firings.
As the minority party, Democrats certainly have less power, but they are far from powerless.
Further, Jeffries’ question suggests a concerning lack of familiarity with the modest—but substantial, and potentially impactful—array of tools at his and his colleagues’ disposal. In fact, as I lay out below, there are many things congressional Democrats can do, including requesting investigations from accountability offices; utilizing formal and informal hearings; writing letters to agency heads; and being opportunistic about accountability maneuvers at their disposal, even those unlikely to succeed in an immediate sense.
Congressional Oversight As The Minority Party
Democrats need to be winning the messaging battle, constantly telling the American people how Trump and DOGE are facilitating material harms. In that fight, Democrats have a key, but largely neglected, point of leverage: congressional oversight.
Prior to last year’s election, I wrote in Common Dreams that Democrats needed to better utilize their congressional oversight powers. But that was when Democrats had a Senate majority, and therefore the power to conduct official hearings, investigations, and issue subpoenas.
So, what can they do now?
Request Investigations from Accountability Offices
As the minority party, Democrats certainly have less power, but they are far from powerless. For starters, they can outsource investigations and research to nonpartisan offices like the Congressional Research Service, Inspectors General, or the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Each office has their usefulness, but given that President Donald Trump fired 17 Inspector General in a corrupt move that is currently being litigated, Democrats should focus on utilizing the GAO.
The GAO is an independent agency that acts as a watchdog at the request of Congress, conducting investigations to examine how federal dollars are spent and offering nonpartisan solutions on how to improve federal programs. (Essentially, GAO is what DOGE claims to be, minus the neo-nazi tendencies, complete lack of expertise, and rampant corruption.) Any member of Congress can request the GAO look into a given topic or program, though the office can take anywhere from a few months to over a year before finalizing reports.
For every instance of DOGE wreaking havoc, Democrats need to request a corresponding investigation, even if the GAO doesn’t have capacity to undertake each one or release the reports on an expedited timeline.
The long-term nature of the process can be leveraged strategically, though, with just a little bit of media savvy. In January of 2024, Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) successfully requested a GAO report on the Community Health Center Fund and former President Joe Biden’s Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) program. He and his Republican colleagues then utilized the investigation to hold press conferences and release statements attacking the Biden administration for “prevent[ing] students and families from accessing crucial financial aid.” They got the spotlight they were looking for on their issue of choice, even though the GAO report wasn’t issued until two months prior to the election. (Of course, Republicans have done nothing to help implement the recommendations GAO made, now that the report is out.)
Regardless of whether Republican concern was genuine, the utility is clear. Democrats can make headlines today simply by requesting and securing investigations they are entitled, by virtue of being members of Congress, to ask for. In fact, Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) recently did just that, successfully asking the GAO to investigate Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent giving DOGE access to payment systems. Perhaps more importantly, however, Democrats can use the GAO report that will eventually result to remind the American people of Bessent’s lawlessness long after it was buried in the public’s mind under a deluge of other scandals.
This tactic needs to be used for every agency and program under attack from DOGE. Request the GAO to investigate how spending freezes at the USDA and USAID will affect farmers. Request a report on staffing cuts at the FAA and the effect on air safety and travel times. Spend tax season demanding a review of how decimating the IRS will increase tax avoidance by the wealthy and increase wait times. For every instance of DOGE wreaking havoc, Democrats need to request a corresponding investigation, even if the GAO doesn’t have capacity to undertake each one or release the reports on an expedited timeline. (If Democrats ever give votes to an appropriations process that once again governs federal spending, they should request the GAO expand its staffing. Sadly, there are many talented recent civil servants on the job market.)
Utilize Hearings, Both Formal and Informal
Without control in either chamber, Democrats have little say over official Congressional hearings. But they still have two important roles they can harness: calling witnesses and asking questions. Democrats cannot subpoena witnesses, but they can still choose a witness to voluntarily appear at hearings. This often results in experts that can calmly explain the intricacies of an issue and recommend how to improve the situation. This isn’t bad on its face, but in the era of DOGE decimation, Democrats should be discerning in their witness choices.
Each DOGE attack means someone lost their job and someone is a victim of the funding cuts. Leverage this harm! Bring in people who have been fired at a given agency to explain exactly who they used to help or protect. Bring in the victims to explain how their lives will now be worse because of Trump and Musk. Democrats can force Congressional Republicans to face the people affected by their failure to constrain Trump. As recent vitriolic town halls exemplify, there’s ample appetite to make Republicans answer publicly for their cowardice.
In the same vein, Democrats need to be combative in every hearing. We rolled out a series of suggested questions for Trump nominees in their confirmation hearings, including new questions that Secretary of Education nominee Linda McMahon needs to answer before her confirmation vote. Unfortunately, Democrats were woefully unprepared, even praising some nominees and failing to use their fully allotted questioning time. This needs to change. Every hearing is an opportunity to produce a viral clip that can break through to people otherwise not paying attention.
Additionally, as my colleague Emma Marsano explained in this newsletter last week, Democrats can also hold informal hearings that amplify the voices of people most impacted by executive overreach. There are, unfortunately, countless examples they could be elevating through hearings, social media, press hits, and coordination with influencers. Democrats could also creatively use their franking privileges—sending mail to their constitutions using their signature as postage rather than a stamp—to inform constituents on “matters of public concern” or issue “questionnaires seeking public opinion” to get an idea of how DOGE actions are affecting people locally.
Flood the Zone with Letters
Members of Congress regularly send letters to heads of executive departments demanding answers and information regarding happenings under their purview. To their credit, Democrats have made good use of letters: to OMB Director Russell Vought demanding he reverse attacks on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; to the SEC and other agencies demanding an investigation into Trump’s meme coin; to HUD Secretary Scott Turner highlighting the effect that proposed staffing cuts will have on seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities, among many others.
While this method of oversight is virtually all bark, it’s a useful tool in garnering headlines to amplify your message. Democratic members on each congressional committee should closely monitor DOGE and other executive branch attacks on government functions, then produce as many letters as possible with the goal of getting coverage in the media. Not every letter will be picked up, but every headline that tells the public “Democrats are Fighting Republican Attacks on [Fill in the Blank]” is useful. These letters can also be referred back to as launching points for formal investigations or hearings should Democrats regain either chamber in the midterms.
Take Longshots, Even if They Miss
Democrats can try to utilize subpoena and impeachment powers, even if they are longshots. My colleague Kenny Stancil explained yesterday in The American Prospect that Democrats can (and should) move to impeach Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent for his capitulation to, and lying about, DOGE’s attempts to access payment systems. While unlikely to result in a successful impeachment vote, it raises the issue’s salience and forces congressional Republicans to own it.
Similarly, earlier this month Democrats in the Oversight Committee tried to rush through a vote to subpoena Musk while Republicans were out of the room. It was a long shot that fell short, but it’s worth trying such tactics at every opportunity, on the off chance it works one time.
To be clear, none of these tactics alone will save us. Trump’s administration will continue to terrorize the civil service, and congressional Republicans will continue to stand by. But with many months between now and the midterms, Democrats need to use—no, leverage—every form of oversight at their disposal to slow down the onslaught, inform the American public, and ensure Republicans pay a hefty price.
There are far too many tools at congressional Democrats’ disposal for them to throw up their hands and act as though nothing can be done—people elected them to do something, and they need to act like it, especially with so much at stake.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Analysis Warns Climate Crisis Threatens US Nuclear Reactors
"Climate change is expected to exacerbate natural hazards—including heat, drought, wildfires, flooding, hurricanes, and sea level rise," the report reads.
Apr 03, 2024
The nation's nuclear reactors may be at risk due to the climate emergency, according to a report released by the U.S. Government Accountability Office on Tuesday.
The report claims the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) needs to consider these risks as it regulates nuclear power plants going forward. There are currently 94 nuclear reactors in the United States that could be affected.
"Climate change is expected to exacerbate natural hazards—including heat, drought, wildfires, flooding, hurricanes, and sea-level rise. In addition, climate change may affect extreme cold weather events," the report reads. "Risks to nuclear power plants from these hazards include loss of offsite power, damage to systems and equipment, and diminished cooling capacity, potentially resulting in reduced operations or plant shutdowns."
Extreme weather event like floods can pose safety risks to #NuclearPower plants. #ClimateChange is likely to make these natural hazards more severe.
Our new report looks at how @NRCgov could better address climate risks to nuclear power plants: https://t.co/lZhGAjtNkF pic.twitter.com/MOjambENtG
— U.S. GAO (@USGAO) April 2, 2024
The report notes that many new reactors are currently being developed, which increases the need for the NRC to properly regulate those reactors.
It says that the NRC has mostly used historical data to "identify and assess safety risks," which would not account for the climate risks that are likely to threaten reactors in the future. The report claims most reactors could be negatively impacted by future climate risks.
Beyond Nuclear, which advocates against nuclear power and weapons, said in a statement that that GAO's findings and recommendations confirm what the group has been litigating with the NRC—that "the agency cannot continue to ignore the safety impacts on nuclear power plants from the worsening climate crisis."
"These risks include a worsening of natural hazards and encompass heat and cold, drought, wildfires, flooding, hurricanes, and sea-level rise, according to the GAO, all of which could seriously jeopardize the safe operation of the nation's current fleet that is going through extreme license renewals—and any future new... nuclear reactors if not properly safeguarded," the group said.
Plans to triple the amount of nuclear power in 22 countries by 2050 that were announced at the most recent United Nations climate summit have been denounced as "dangerous" and not a realistic solution to address the climate emergency.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular