Elon Musk, a key ally to President-elect Donald J. Trump whom he has designated to oversee cuts to government spending, helped torpedo a bipartisan spending deal after relentlessly criticizing aspects of the package on Wednesday.
In over 150 posts on X, his social media platform, Mr. Musk called for Republicans to reject the deal, in part by promoting a flurry of inaccurate claims about what is included in the bill released on Tuesday night.
Here’s a fact-check.
What Was Said
“How can this be called a ‘continuing resolution” if it includes a 40 percent pay increase for Congress?”
This is exaggerated. The spending package includes a raise of 3.8 percent for members of Congress, not 40 percent.
Mr. Musk reposted a misinterpretation of an article from Punchbowl News, a publication based in Washington that covers congressional news. The article noted that members have not received a raise since 2009 and that their annual salary over the past 15 years has been $174,000. Had members received a cost-of-living increase every year since 2009, their salary would now be about 40 percent higher or $243,000, the article said, citing a report from the Congressional Research Service.
A 1989 law set a formula for annual cost-of-living adjustments for congressional salaries, but since 2009, Congress has passed laws — generally tucked into broader spending packages — every year freezing the pay of its own members. The maximum potential pay increase under the formula for January 2025 is 3.8 percent, or $6,600, according to the Congressional Research Service.
The spending deal allows for that 3.8 increase by removing language in a previous spending law that blocked the pay adjustment.
What Was Said
“This should not be funded by your tax dollars!” Mr. Musk wrote in sharing a post that claims the bill includes a “$3 billion NFL stadium in Washington, D.C.”
False. The legislation extends and modifies a lease between the federal government and the city of Washington for land that could be used to develop and build a football stadium. It does not provide funding for a stadium.
The Washington Commanders previously played at Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium, just over two miles east of the Capitol, in Washington from 1961 to 1996, before moving to suburban Maryland. The franchise is now considering a move to Washington or Virginia as it nears the end of its current lease at the stadium formerly known as FedEx Field, often ranked by fans and players as one of the worst venues in the N.F.L.,
Currently, the city of Washington owns and operates R.F.K. stadium, but the 190-acre campus is federal land administered by the National Park Service. In 1988, the Park Service and Washington entered into a ground lease for the campus that will expire in 2038 and already allows for stadium construction. The spending deal includes a bipartisan bill that would give the city administrative jurisdiction over 174 acres of the land under a renewable 99-year lease — also allowing for the construction of residential and commercial buildings — but the federal government would still own the land.
The federal government currently receives no payment for leasing the land, and would not under the bill so the Congressional Budget Office has said that it would have little to no cost or effect on the federal budget. But lawmakers from Maryland, which is hoping to retain the Commanders, have argued that the no-cost lease is nonetheless a bad deal for federal tax payers and the Park Service should sell the land instead.
It is unclear what the $3 billion figure refers to and an updated version of the post Mr. Musk shared had removed the figure. But Virginia lawmakers in 2022 proposed helping finance a $3 billion stadium and entertainment complex if the Commanders chose to move to the state.
What Was Said
“‘Shutting down’ the government (which doesn’t actually shut down critical functions btw) is infinitely better than passing a horrible bill”
This needs context. Mr. Musk is correct that shutting down the government does not affect essential services, but the public may still feel the impact.
During a shutdown, postal workers, federal prosecutors and investigators, active-duty members of the military, Transportation Security Administration employees and other federal employees continue to work, mostly without pay. Social Security checks are still sent out and medical care for veterans is unaffected.
But people may lose access to food stamps and other federal nutrition programs. Inspections of food, hazardous waste, drinking water and chemical facilities could be paused or scaled back. National parks may close or provide no visitor services. And screenings at airports may be significantly delayed.
Moreover, the last government shutdown, a five-week partial shutdown, lowered gross domestic product by $8 billion, the Congressional Budget Office estimated.
What Was Said
“One of the worst bills ever written,” Mr. Musk wrote in sharing a post that also claimed the bill contains “$60B to Ukraine” and “Mask/vaccine mandates.”
This lacks evidence. The bill does not appear to contain additional funding for Ukraine or language mandating masks or vaccines.
In April, a foreign aid package passed by Congress and signed into law by President Biden contained about $60 billion in assistance for Ukraine. And in late November, Politico reported that the Biden administration had requested $24 billion in additional aid for Ukraine. But Speaker Mike Johnson rejected that request in early December, noting that the November election changed the dynamic of the war.
What Was Said
“Outrageous,” Mr. Musk wrote in sharing a post that contends the bill would “BLOCK an investigation into the January 6th committee.”
This is misleading. This appeared to refer to a section in the bill that amends current law over the treatment of phone and email records of House members. A similar provision already exists for the Senate, and it would not block an investigation into the Jan. 6 committee.
According to a December report from the Justice Department’s inspector general, the agency under the first Trump administration obtained phone and email records of journalists, members of Congress and their staff members directly from service providers. By seeking and receiving court approval through a compulsory process known as “nondisclosure orders,” the Justice Department prohibited the service providers from informing the journalists and lawmakers that their records had been obtained.
A 2020 spending package protected lawmakers in the Senate from nondisclosure orders by including language stipulating that the service providers “shall not be barred, through operation of any court order or any statutory provision, from notifying the Senate office of any legal process seeking disclosure of Senate data.” The current spending deal copied that language for the House.
The provision does not prevent lawmakers from investigating the Jan. 6 committee. The Republican-controlled House Administration Committee is currently doing just that, having released an interim report recommending a criminal investigation into Liz Cheney, a former Republican member of the Jan. 6 committee.
What Was Said
“We’re funding bioweapons labs in this bill!”
False. Mr. Musk shared a screenshot of a section of the bill that would provide statutory authorization for regional biocontainment laboratories. These laboratories, housed at universities across the country, already exist and already receive funding from the federal government. As their name suggests, the laboratories conduct research on biodefense and preventing infectious diseases; they do not manufacture biological weapons.
For example, scientists at the lab at Duke University are working on a universal flu vaccine and scientists are using the lab at the University of Louisville to better understand a bacteria that spread the plague.
The post Assessing Elon Musk’s Criticisms of the Government Spending Deal appeared first on New York Times.
