K Street crashes into ‘nearly un-lobbyable' Elon Musk
But solving for Musk could pay huge dividends. If K Street can figure out how to lobby him, they can capitalize off the anxiety pervading Washington that drives companies and industries to sign six-figure retainers.
'Washington is really used to deliberative processes where stakeholders get input,' said Alex Conant, co-founder of Firehouse Strategies. 'Musk doesn't believe in any of that.'
That frustration is shared across Washington, where private interests trying to protect their own projects—or nudging DOGE to target a competitor instead, sometimes through DOGE's X account — are running into the same problem. Musk operates with a singular mission: cutting government waste at breakneck speed, with little patience for the conventional playbook.
Lobbyists find they're being asked not only to save a company from their fear of Musk's unpredictable social media ire or a sweeping DOGE cut that would hit their industry or wipe out their contract. They're also being queried about potential real estate investments from the General Services Administration's plans to sell federal buildings and business opportunities arising from Musk's effort to modernize government software. Lobbyists without direct ties to Musk's inner circle are deploying other strategies such as working more conventional agency contacts or scouring the DOGE leader's social media feed.
This report is based on conversations with ten Republican lobbyists and operatives trying to navigate the new Washington.
'Every client has a worry right now,' said a GOP operative, who, like others, was granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. 'The problem is that this is not your typical administration, where you could call up a staffer, schedule a meeting, place a few op-eds, and move somebody to see things your way. Elon Musk is nearly un-lobbyable. You have to work non-traditional routes.'
Musk has imported the Silicon Valley ethos of 'move fast and break things' to the federal government, carrying out his mission with a kind of maniacal urgency that has left businesses scrambling. He is also notoriously unsympathetic — a trait he sees as essential for running a company and, now, a government initiative — making him a nightmare for lobbyists used to schmoozing their way to results.
Some lobbyists, unwilling to promise results they can't deliver, are turning away clients with DOGE asks that appear impossible, such as saving foreign development projects. Others are focusing their DOGE-related efforts on federal agencies or the DOGE Caucus on Capitol Hill. Or they are trying unconventional tactics, such as reaching out to influencers Musk engages with on X or seeding stories in conservative media.
'DOGE is being made up as it goes along by people who remain much more entrenched in their pre-existing private sector professional circles than they are within any network of public policy experts,' said Jeff Hauser of the left-leaning Revolving Door Project, which scrutinizes executive branch appointees. 'As a result, it wouldn't surprise me that people or companies with whom Musk and his team used to collaborate prior to Trump's inauguration retain the best channels to DOGE and greatest influence with Musk.'
One well-connected Trump lobbyist granted anonymity to speak freely said he has been inundated with requests to set up DOGE meetings, most of which he declines because it's an impossible feat. 'They all say, 'I want to meet with the DOGE people,' and we joke, 'All right, just email bigballs@doge.gov,'' he said, referring to the 19-year-old DOGE employee who previously used the online moniker 'Big Balls.'
It's not just trying to save government contracts that have kept D.C. lobbyists busy — they've also been asked to scope out potential opportunities from DOGE's work. As the government seeks to sell off federal buildings, another Republican lobbyist has been asked for information from real estate investors looking to capitalize on such future sales from the General Services Administration.
'There's a lot of real estate investors who are interested in that,' the person said.
The secrecy surrounding DOGE contributes to the perception that Musk is a black box. He doesn't maintain a conventional political team, and
his tight circle of Silicon Valley loyalists and DOGE operatives
executing his visions are tough to reach. 'How are you going to find these guys? You're going to start searching basements in government buildings?' the lobbyist asked sarcastically.
Those who have pre-existing relationships with Musk — or lead companies large enough to command his attention — have found ways to reach him directly. One company wrongly targeted by Musk managed to correct the misunderstanding, convincing him that a different entity was responsible for the issue that triggered his scrutiny, according to a lobbyist with knowledge of the situation granted anonymity to speak freely.
For everyone else, the options are limited. Many have opted to work the federal agencies, where there is still some semblance of process and recognizable Trump allies in senior positions. Others are turning to Capitol Hill, trying to extract morsels of information on DOGE's next moves from members of the DOGE caucus, including co-chairs Sen.
Joni Ernst
(R-Iowa), Rep.
Pete Sessions
(R-Texas), Rep.
Blake Moore
(R-Utah), and Rep.
Aaron Bean
(R-Fla.).
While members of DOGE have taken the lead on identifying cuts, Trump has publicly stated that
his Cabinet will have the final say
, so Washington operatives are working to preemptively frame their clients' projects in a positive light before they land on the chopping block.
'Depending on what it is, you really have to go through the political channels of each agency and say, 'Hey, can we just talk about this factually first?'' said an in-house Fortune 50 lobbyist granted anonymity to discuss internal matters. 'I think there is value in that. If you can make a good case, they're happy to identify what it is…but it's not easy.'
Another emerging strategy: leveraging Musk's online habits and vying for second-tier access. Given the billionaire's near-constant engagement on X, lobbyists are analyzing the accounts he follows, trying to influence him through the people he already interacts with.
'Everyone in town is analyzing that list, mapping out how to get to them,' the Republican operative said of the one thousand accounts that Musk follows.
Among the influencers rumored to have a direct line to Musk is Ian Miles Cheong, a Malaysian right-wing commentator and social media personality who contributes to Rebel News and has previously worked with The Daily Caller and Russian state media RT. Others in Musk's orbit who are considered potential access points include people like Trump's eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., conservative activist Charlie Kirk and the right wing influencer Chaya Raichik, who runs the account Libs of TikTok.
Some have found success by going through Musk's Silicon Valley allies who have been deputized to work within the agencies on DOGE. 'I've been able to get things in front of Musk that way, knowing that he will respond to them,' said a longtime D.C. lobbyist who has ties to two of Musk's business associates who are now in Washington.
Short of direct access, other lobbyists are resorting to placing stories in right-wing media like Breitbart or The Daily Caller, hoping that staffers will read them and take notice.
But no method is foolproof, and the new reality is difficult for some executives to accept.
'Just because you wrote a check, or because you know somebody, or you smoke cigars together, it's not changing the outcome of these decisions,' said one lobbyist. 'That's the hardest part for people to accept.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Miami Herald
12 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Elon Musk's xAI pushes Grok into Palantir territory
Elon Musk's 2025 has been far from quiet. Starship explosions, robotaxi reveals, and Twitter wars with President Donald Trump have headlined Musk's chaotic year. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Yet, in the middle of the noise, Musk's AI brainchild in xAI continues moving like clockwork. Moreover, with the newest update, xAI's Grok could be angling to knock on the same high-security doors Palantir's been guarding for years. Image source: Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images Recent months have shown that xAI doesn't lack any ambition or capital. Since its hotly anticipated launch in March 2023, the company has built Colossus, a GPU supercluster that scaled from 100,000 to 200,000 Nvidia units in just 122 days. Now, it's aiming for a million, to position itself as the world's largest AI training platform. That's some serious flex in a market where compute capacity is critical in staying ahead. Musk has kept xAI separate from Tesla, though he's alluded to a future shareholder vote on deeper investment. The great thing is that the strategy is clear with xAI. Related: Elon Musk's xAI is already shockingly massive A key focus for the AI upstart is to develop frontier large language model (LLM) development across government, defense, and commercial domains. At the same time, the goal is to seamlessly embed Grok into Tesla cars and Optimus humanoid robots for edge deployment. The funding numbers are just incredible. xAI recently secured $10 billion, split evenly between a $5 billion equity raise and a $5 billion debt package arranged by Morgan Stanley. That round took its meteoric valuation to $113 billion, thanks in part to a $2 billion boost from SpaceX. Now, talks suggest a new raise that could take its value to between $170 billion and $200 billion. More Tech Stock News: Cathie Wood drops bold message on Apple, Tesla stockGoogle Brain founder has an unexpected one-word message on AIUnsung AI stock pops after joining S&P 500 That's a monstrous jump from early estimates of $33 billion to $80 billion. Some call it hype. Others say it's the price of building the most potent AI infrastructure at scale. Elon Musk's xAI is taking things up a notch with his government work, and not quietly. Just days after the Grok 4 reveal, Musk has now "Grok for Government," a customized suite of AI tools for federal, state, and local agencies. The move signals Musk's intent to jump into the high-stakes defense-grade AI world. The announcement comes with some real muscle. xAI secured a massive new Department of Defense contract with a $200 million ceiling, standing alongside tech giants like Google, OpenAI, and Anthropic. While that sum is relatively modest next to bigger contracts, it's a powerful entry point for a company still in its nascence. "Supporting the critical missions of the United States Government is a key part of this mission," xAI said in a statement. Related: JPMorgan reveals 9 stocks with major problems The Department's Chief Digital and AI Officer Doug Matty echoed that urgency, saying the government must adopt commercial AI tools in warfighting and intelligence efforts. For Musk, it's more than a business deal. Grok's powerful future is linked closely to Tesla's broader ecosystem, and this unusual overlap puts Musk's fingerprints all over the next generation of U.S. AI capabilities. Could this be a direct challenge to Palantir? More importantly, though, the arrival of Grok for Government can effectively take xAI in direct competition with Palantir. Palantir has effectively become the U.S. government's go-to name in mission-critical analytics. It pulled in a whopping $1.2 billion from U.S. government contracts in 2024, a robust 30% jump YOY, with deep roots in defense and intelligence through its Gotham and Foundry platforms. However, where Palantir leans on Big Data fusion and tailor-made deployments, Grok offers greater agility. xAI's tools could potentially offer faster rollouts and flexible API integrations. Early signs of traction have already been emerging, with reports that the General Services Administration is exploring Grok, pointing to stronger civilian agency adoption. If Grok could match or beat Palantir on speed, cost, or ease of use, we could see Musk's name plastered on more than just SpaceX rockets and EVs. With AI looking to reshape military logistics and fraud detection, the real battle may be over who defines the next phase of American power. Related: Moody's drops 2-word warning on housing market The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.


Boston Globe
12 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
The push to defund Planned Parenthood hit other clinics in Maine. Now their group is suing.
Vanessa Shields-Haas, a nurse practitioner, said the organization's clinics have been seeing all patients as usual and completing Medicaid paperwork for visits — but not submitting it because it appears the provision took effect as soon as the law was signed. 'Knowing how hard it is to access care in this state, not allowing these community members to access their care, it's cruel,' Shields-Haas said. Advertisement Maine clinics appear to be only others included in cuts Republican lawmakers targeted Planned Parenthood in one piece of what President Donald Trump dubbed the 'big beautiful' bill that Congress passed and the president signed earlier this month. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up While advocates focused on Planned Parenthood, the bill did not mention it by name. Instead, it cut off reimbursements for organizations that are primarily engaged in family planning services — which generally include things such as contraception, abortion and pregnancy tests — and received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023. The U.S. Senate's parliamentarian rejected a 2017 effort to defund Planned Parenthood because it was written to exclude all other providers by barring payments only to groups that received more than $350 million a year in Medicaid funds. The not-for-profit Maine organization asserts in its legal challenge that the threshold was lowered to $800,000 this time around to make sure Planned Parenthood would not be the only affected entity. Advertisement It is the only other organization that has come forward publicly to say that its funding is at risk, too. Federal law already bars taxpayer money from covering most abortions. Instead, the money in question involves other health services, such as cancer screenings and tests, and treatment for sexually transmitted infections. Proponents of that wrinkle in the law say abortion providers use Medicaid money for other services to subsidize abortion. 'This has never been just about Planned Parenthood,' Autumn Christensen, vice president of public policy for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement. 'It's about any Big Abortion business or network that performs abortions. Taxpayers should never be forced to prop up an industry that profits from ending human lives.' The Associated Press has sought comment from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which is named in the lawsuit. Maine Family Planning goes beyond abortion Maine Family Planning operates 18 clinics across the state. In 2024, it had about 7,200 family planning patients, including 645 who obtained abortions. Services include pregnancy testing, contraception, family planning counseling, breast exams, cancer screenings and treatment of sexually transmitted infections. Some of the sites also offer primary care services, where there are another 600 or so patients. There are about 800 gender-affirming care patients and about 200 who use its upstart mobile clinic, said George Hill, the president and CEO of the organization. Hill said that for about two-thirds of its patients, Maine Family Planning is the only place they get medical care in a typical year. Advertisement About half of the patients not seeking abortions are enrolled in Medicaid, and the clinics have been receiving about $1.9 million a year in reimbursements, which accounts for about one-fourth of the organization's budget. 'It's a difficult state to provide care in and now we're facing this,' Hill said. In its lawsuit, the group says it has enough reserves to keep seeing patients covered by Medicaid without reimbursement only through October. Finding health care can be a struggle in this rural state Maine Family Planning says that if it had to turn away patients, it would be more complicated for them than simply finding another provider. There aren't enough in rural areas, the group notes — and many don't accept Medicaid. One patient, Ashley Smith, said she started going to Maine Family Planning about five years ago when she could not find other health care she could afford. While she's not enrolled in Medicaid, she fears clinics could be shuttered because of cuts. 'I am so worried that if my clinic closes, I don't know what I'll do or if I'll be able to see another provider,' Smith said. Maine Family Planning also supports care at more than 40 other health care facilities. Other than the Planned Parenthood locations that receive money from Maine Family Planning, those other providers don't stand to lose their Medicaid reimbursements. But, Hill said, the loss of Medicaid funding for Maine Family Planning would mean the group would have less to send to partners. The Maine clinics say the law violates their right to equal protection The Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing Maine Family Planning in the challenge, says in its legal filing that the defunding denies it equal protection under the law because it would have funding cut off, but organizations that provide similar services would not. Advertisement 'The administration would rather topple a statewide safety network than let a patient get a cancer screening at a facility that also offers abortion care,' Meetra Mehdizadeh, a Center for Reproductive Rights lawyer, said in an interview. Planned Parenthood already sued and won a reprieve from a judge, preventing its Medicaid payments cutoff — at least until July 21 — while a court considers that case. Planned Parenthood has warned that the law could put 200 of its affiliates' roughly 600 clinics across the U.S. at risk of closing.


Time Magazine
14 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
What Republicans Have Said About the Epstein Controversy
The Trump Administration's handling of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's case is opening divides among Republican lawmakers, officials, and right-wing media figures as the President confronts a wave of backlash from his MAGA supporters. A memo released by the Department of Justice and FBI that denies the existence of an Epstein 'client list' and states that he died by suicide, aiming to put to bed conspiracies surrounding the disgraced financier harbored by those on the right, has sparked widespread outcry from President Donald Trump's MAGA base. 'I don't understand what the interest or what the fascination is,' Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews on Tuesday, speaking of public interest in Epstein. 'The credible information's been given.' Amid the blowback, Trump allies from House Speaker Mike Johnson to right-wing activist Laura Loomer have broken with the Administration over its handling of the issue, while some other conservatives have voiced support—or sought to avoid the controversy. Prominent voices on the right clash with the Trump Administration Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, an outspoken MAGA voice in Congress, told CNN that the Trump Administration's mishandling of files related to Epstein's case, which Trump pledged to release during his 2024 campaign, is 'just a red line that it crosses for many people.' 'This is something that's been talked about by many people serving in the Administration, myself and many others on the right and the left of there needing to be transparency of the rich and powerful elites,' she added. Conspiracy theories about Epstein's case were previously promoted by multiple high-ranking members of the Administration, including Vice President J.D. Vance and FBI Director Kash Patel. Over the weekend, however, Patel said in a post on X that 'the conspiracy theories just aren't true, never have been.' Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana told NBC News that he understands the public intrigue surrounding Epstein, 'who he trafficked those women to and why they weren't prosecuted.' 'I think the Justice Department is going to have to go back to the drawing board in answering those questions,' he said. Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee told The Hill he 'would just like the files to be turned over.' Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, another outspoken MAGA lawmaker, on Tuesday called for the appointment of a special counsel in the matter, floating former Rep. Matt Gaetz for the role. 'We deserve the truth about the Epstein Files,' she wrote in a post on X. 'I'm ready for a Special Counsel to handle this.' Right-wing media commentators have also contributed to the blowback. 'The fact that the U.S. government, the one that I voted for, refused to take my question seriously and instead said, 'Case closed, shut up conspiracy theorist,' was too much for me,' right-wing commentator and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson said in a speech at Turning Point USA Student Action Summit on Friday. Far-right activist and Trump ally Laura Loomer warned that the 'lack of transparency' would cost Republicans House and Senate seats in a post on X. In an interview with Politico, Loomer called for a special counsel to 'independently investigate the handling of the Epstein files.' Attorney General Pam Bondi has faced particular ire. Bondi in February stated that Epstein's alleged 'client list' was 'sitting on my desk right now to review.' The same month, the Justice Department released a cache of files related to Epstein's case that were heavily redacted and mostly consisted of information that had previously been made public despite Bondi's promises that the documents would include flight logs and the names of people involved, leaving many underwhelmed. Following the release of the memo last week, Bondi said that she had been referring to the case file on Epstein in the February interview as opposed to a 'client list.' Trump defended Bondi, writing in a Truth Social post earlier this week that the Attorney General 'is doing a FANTASTIC JOB!' But others on the right have voiced a much more critical sentiment. After initially saying he trusted the Administration to make the 'right decision,' House Speaker Mike Johnson urged Bondi to 'come forward and explain' what happened with the Epstein 'client list' in an interview with youtuber Benny Johnson. 'I'm for transparency,' the House lawmaker said. 'It's a very delicate subject but we should put everything out there and let the people decide it.' Still, he opposed Democratic efforts to release files related to Epstein. "I'm sure it's a relief for Pam Bondi to hear the president is still in her corner. Unfortunately, huge swaths of the party are not,' conservative commentator Megyn Kelly wrote on X. 'She repeatedly misled on Epstein. Then didn't have the courage to explain herself. Suddenly, she's camera shy & no Qs allowed. Good luck!" Carlson blamed Bondi for the backlash facing the Trump Administration in an NBC News interview published earlier this week. Saying he now thinks the Justice Department doesn't have 'much relevant information about Jeffrey Epstein's sex crimes,' Carlson told the outlet, 'Rather than just admit that, Pam Bondi made a bunch of ludicrous claims on cable news shows that she couldn't back up, and this current outrage is the result.' Inside the department, FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino, who previously promoted conspiracy theories about a government coverup related to Epstein's case, has reportedly had a falling out with Bondi over the issue and threatened to quit. Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who has clashed with Trump on issues from Iran to the President's 'Big Beautiful Bill,' on Tuesday announced he was launching an effort to force a vote on the release of files related to Epstein's case alongside Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California with a procedural tool known as a discharge petition. 'We all deserve to know what's in the Epstein files, who's implicated, and how deep this corruption goes,' Massie said in a statement, adding, 'If your Representative won't sign the discharge petition, ask why.' Some GOP members of Congress voice support—or dodge the issue Still, some Republican lawmakers, including Chuck Grassley of Iowa, have made public statements in support of Administration officials or are backing off from making any strong comments about the issue at all. Grassley said that based on what he knows he does believe Bondi provided enough information about Epstein, though he told The Hill that he 'always urge[s] the greatest of transparency.' Sen. Jim Jordan of Ohio, a strong Trump ally, told NBC News he trusted the President and his team. Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Sen. John Cornyn echoed the sentiment by deferring to Trump on the matter. Rep. Darrell Issa of California spoke more strongly in support of Trump, saying that much of what his base believes about the case simply isn't true. 'I trust the people who reported it to us and who looked at them,' Issa said. As a number of Republican lawmakers have looked to avoid the controversy, Democratic lawmakers have sought to take advantage of it by forcing their GOP colleagues to show their cards. Rep. Khanna introduced an amendment to a cryptocurrency bill that would have required Bondi to release the Epstein files. 'This is a question of whose side are you on?' Khanna said on the House floor on Monday. Most of the Republicans on the House Rules Committee—Reps. Virginia Foxx, Michelle Fischbach, Erin Houchin, Nicholas Langworthy, Austin Scott, Morgan Griffith, and Brian Jack—voted to block the amendment. Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina was the sole Republican on the panel to vote to advance it for the consideration of the full House. Rep. Chip Roy did not vote. Langworthy defended his vote by saying that Democrats politicized the amendment. 'He voted no because it was a pointless political gimmick, not a path to justice,' a spokesperson from Langworthy's office told ABC News 10. 'I think most of us believe what's appropriate will be released when it is time for the president to release it,' said Foxx, who chairs the committee. A similar move by Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland last week won more Republican support, however. Van Hollen introduced an amendment to a funding bill before the Senate Appropriations Committee that would force the Justice Department to retain Epstein files, and provide a report to Congress on the history of the case. The committee approved it unanimously with bipartisan support.