Big Beautiful Bill fight deepens: Trump threatens Musk over federal contracts, subsidies
Big Beautiful Bill fight deepens: Trump threatens Musk over federal contracts, subsidies Why is Elon Musk trashing the legislation demanded by President Donald Trump and ushered to a razor-thin approval margin in the U.S. House by Speaker Mike Johnson?
Show Caption
Hide Caption
President Trump gives Musk a lift to Palm Beach aboard Air Force One
President Donald Trump makes his ninth trip to his Winter White House at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach since taking office
Elon Musk criticizes the "Big Beautiful Bill" supported by President Trump, calling it a "disgusting abomination."
Musk, who previously supported Trump and led the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), now opposes the bill due to its potential impact on the national debt.
The bill aims to extend the 2017 tax cuts and address border security, but critics argue it would negatively affect Medicaid.
(This story has been updated include new information.)
The acrimonious social-media salvos over the Big Beautiful Bill arguably mark the most stunning turnabout within the realm of MAGA.
The world's richest man, Elon Musk, is currently trashing the legislation demanded by President Donald Trump and ushered to a razor-thin approval margin in the U.S. House by Speaker Mike Johnson. It would extend the 2017 tax cuts, a signature achievement of Trump's first term, and address border security, while Democratic critics say it would gut Medicaid.
Musk posted on X that the legislation is "massive, outrageous, pork-filled" and declared it a "disgusting abomination." Trump has dismissed what he said are "false statements are being made about 'THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL'' and has defended the measure as a "waste, fraud and abuse" slashing measure.
On June 5, Trump said he was "very disappointed" by the opposition from Musk.
"Elon and I had a great relationship," Trump said in answer to a reporter's question in the White House. "I don't know if we will anymore."
Musk-Trump feud then turns bitter on social media
The president continued on social media saying Musk was "wearing thin" and "I asked him to leave." He said Musk "just went CRAZY" when the administration "took away" the electric vehicle mandate.
Late in the day, the White House insisted the bill required $1.7 trillion in savings despite the Congressional Budget Office calculations the bill would add $2.8 trillion in debt over the next decade.
Trump then added in a Truth Social post that the"easiest way" to save taxpayer money would be to "terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts." He later wrote that, "I don't mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done so months ago."
Musk fired back on X, saying Trump's assertions were "such an obvious lie. So sad." He also wrote that without his assistance Trump would have lost to Kamala Harris in the November election and the Democrats would control the U.S. Senate.
Then he delivered a nasty blow.
"Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!" he posted on X.
The reference is to the sex-abuse scandal involving the late Palm Beach financier Jeffrey Epstein. Trump knew Epstein but there has not been evidence or documents that tie Trump to Epstein's abuses.
He followed that with a prediction that the "Trump tariffs will cause a recession in the second half of this year." He agreed with another X user who called for Trump to be impeached and replaced by Vice President JD Vance.
The Musk-Trump public rift is remarkable considering it is over legislation that is both the administration's signature measure on Capitol Hill and the issue that was central to the Tesla and Space X chief's support for Trump in the 2024 campaign.
Here are five things to know.
Musk helped make cutting spending a central Trump campaign theme
In an August conversation between Musk and Trump on X, the billionaire floated the idea of establishing a panel to look at reducing public-sector spending.
Musk called for a commission to review federal budget expenditures as the two discussed the reason for inflation. Trump repeated his call to expand drilling to bring down consumer product costs, but the billionaire host insisted price increases resulted from government spending hikes by the Biden administration.
"Sure, but back to this basic thing that people try to make complicated but it's not. Inflation is caused by government overspending. Would you agree that we need to look at government spending and have a government efficiency commission that tries to make the spending sensible so the country lives within its means?" Musk said.
Soon after, Musk began appearing at Trump campaign rallies — and brazenly promised to cut $2 trillion from the $6 trillion-plus annual federal budget. He invested, reportedly, nearly $300 million to assist Trump in beating Harris.
On Election Night, Musk was at Trump's watch party at Mar-a-Lago and then ventured with him as part of the entourage to a victory celebration at the Palm Beach County Convention Center in West Palm Beach.
Trump won the election, and DOGE was born
About a week after Trump won the Nov. 5 election, the transition team sent out a news release saying Musk and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy would co-lead the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. Trump said DOGE would procure deep reductions in government spending and wrap up its work by July 4, 2026, America's 250th birthday.
But by the time DOGE got to work, Ramaswamy was out — and off to campaign for the GOP gubernatorial nomination next year in Ohio. Musk and DOGE then set off to work at a much faster pace, sometimes frenetic if not manic.
Pressed by DOGE, for example, some 177 employees at the National Nuclear Security Administration, which maintains the U.S. military's nuclear weapons arsenal, were reportedly fired in February and then the bulk of those were rehired following an uproar. Moreover, all federal workers were summarily ordered to send a weekly email outlining their activities or be summarily fired. In an Oval Office appearance, Musk admitted DOGE might "make mistakes" and "won't be perfect" but would fix errors "very quickly."
All in all, estimates are that as many as 260,000 federal employees were ousted from jobs and savings under $200 billion were achieved. Those would be listed as significant achievements in any other administration, but juxtaposed against the hype and bombast of the Trump White House, they were viewed with disappointment by some and even the president reportedly asked if DOGE's accomplishments were "bull****."
What was DOGE's impact on Florida?
There's not a full accounting yet of how much the Musk-led DOGE budget-cutting slashed from Florida. Or how it will affect communities across the state. But anecdotes abound.
The Miami office of the National Weather Service, critical to hurricane forecasting, has a vacancy rate of 38%, the highest of the five forecasting offices in Florida, according to the NWS Employees Organization. The NWS says it is hiring for 126 critical positions nationwide, but it is not clear how much DOGE's efforts contributed to the openings.
In Palm Beach County, the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge saw three employees fired in February, while three positions at Biscayne National Park, one at Big Cypress National Park and 12 at Everglades National Park were lost, according to the Association of National Park Rangers at the time.
An oncologist-hematologist said her job offer from the West Palm Beach VA was rescinded on Jan. 21, a day after Trump took office. Federal workers, by the way, continue sending their weekly emails to DOGE documenting what they completed at work.
Most recently, Florida State University lost $53 million worth of funding to DOGE's chain-sawing.
Musk became a reviled political figure
After Trump's victory, Musk became a frequent sight here in Palm Beach County.
He was a ubiquitous presence at Mar-a-Lago during the transition period, and there were reports Musk was scouting for a residence in the area. The DOGE chief was frequently seen deplaning with Trump on Air Force One at Palm Beach International Airport during several of the president's 10 trips to the Winter White House through early May.
Along the way, Musk became one of the most unpopular and reviled political figures in America.
Shares in Tesla tanked and polls showed him with high unpopularity ratings. Protests sprung up at Tesla showrooms, including one near West Palm Beach where a demonstration almost ended in tragedy when a car sought to ram protesters, according to eyewitnesses and a police report.
Musk also engaged in a tense confrontation with Secretary of State Marco Rubio over federal employee dismissals during a White House meeting in March. Trump hosted Musk and the former Florida U.S. senator at a dinner at Mar-a-Lago a few days later.
Trump ally Steve Bannon reported in his podcast that Musk and Treasury chief Scott Bessent were involved in an altercation at the White House in April. That physical confrontation was over the state of budget-cutting, Bannon stated.
Almost symbolically, Musk sported a black eye when he appeared at White House last month as his tour of duty with DOGE was concluding.
Why does Musk oppose the Big Beautifil Bill?
Musk's preoccupation with the landmark legislation, now before the U.S. Senate, deals with the $2.1 trillion that estimates say it will add to the U.S. national debt — more than 10 times the stated DOGE savings.
Musk has referred to the measure as the "Debt Slavery Bill." He has urged his 220 million followers on X to call their senators and congressmen to warn them that "Bankrupting America is NOT ok!" and calling on them to "KILL the BILL."
He even derided the name of the legislation, which stems from Trump's call on social media and in speeches for one "big, beautiful bill" that encompassed a wish list of measures on a range of policy issues.
'I think a bill can be big or it could be beautiful," Musk has said. "I don't know if it could be both.'
Trump disagrees. On June 2, he wrote on Truth Social a statement that attacked Democrats, but did not mention Musk by name.
He wrote: "So many false statements are being made about 'THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL,' but what nobody understands is that it's the single biggest Spending Cut in History, by far! But there will be NO CUTS to Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid. In fact, they will be saved from the incompetence of the Democrats."
Democrats have said the legislation will reduce assistance to vulnerable Americans..
'The Republican budget is a dangerous roadmap — laying the groundwork for the largest cuts to Medicaid and food assistance in U.S. history, all to fund massive tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations,' said U.S. Rep. Lois Frankel, D-West Palm Beach, after the measure passed in April. 'That means millions of Americans will lose their health care and struggle to put food on the table. A responsible budget should lower costs for hardworking families. That's what I'm fighting for.'
It's hard to tell right now. but we can pretty much bet the Musk-Trump era will be the focus of both news and the history of Shakespearean drama.
Reporting by Palm Beach Post reporter Kimberly Miller was used in this report.
Antonio Fins is a politics and business editor at The Palm Beach Post, part of the USA TODAY Florida Network. You can reach him at afins@pbpost.com. Help support our journalism. Subscribe today.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
28 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how
A federal judge has approved terms of a sprawling $2.8 billion antitrust settlement that will upend the way college sports have been run for more than a century. In short, schools can now directly pay players through licensing deals — a concept that goes against the foundation of amateurism that college sports was built upon. Some questions and answers about this monumental change for college athletics: Q: What is the House settlement and why does it matter? A: Grant House is a former Arizona State swimmer who sued the defendants (the NCAA and the five biggest athletic conferences in the nation). His lawsuit and two others were combined and over several years the dispute wound up with the settlement that ends a decades-old prohibition on schools cutting checks directly to athletes. Now, each school will be able to make payments to athletes for use of their name, image and likeness (NIL). For reference, there are nearly 200,000 athletes and 350 schools in Division I alone and 500,000 and 1,100 schools across the entire NCAA. Q: How much will the schools pay the athletes and where will the money come from? A: In Year 1, each school can share up to about $20.5 million with their athletes, a number that represents 22% of their revenue from things like media rights, ticket sales and sponsorships. Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne famously told Congress 'those are resources and revenues that don't exist.' Some of the money will come via ever-growing TV rights packages, especially for the College Football Playoff. But some schools are increasing costs to fans through 'talent fees,' concession price hikes and 'athletic fees' added to tuition costs. Q: What about scholarships? Wasn't that like paying the athletes? A: Scholarships and 'cost of attendance' have always been part of the deal for many Division I athletes and there is certainly value to that, especially if athletes get their degree. The NCAA says its member schools hand out nearly $4 billion in athletic scholarships every year. But athletes have long argued that it was hardly enough to compensate them for the millions in revenue they helped produce for the schools, which went to a lot of places, including multimillion-dollar coaches' salaries. They took those arguments to court and won. Q: Haven't players been getting paid for a while now? A: Yes, since 2021. Facing losses in court and a growing number of state laws targeting its amateurism policies, the NCAA cleared the way for athletes to receive NIL money from third parties, including so-called donor-backed collectives that support various schools. Under House, the school can pay that money directly to athletes and the collectives are still in the game. Q: But will $20.5 million cover all the costs for the athletes? A: Probably not. But under terms of the settlement, third parties are still allowed to cut deals with the players. Some call it a workaround, but most simply view this as the new reality in college sports as schools battle to land top talent and then keep them on campus. Top quarterbacks are reportedly getting paid around $2 million a year, which would eat up about 10% of a typical school's NIL budget for all its athletes. Q: Are there any rules or is it a free-for-all? A: The defendant conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12) are creating an enforcement arm that is essentially taking over for the NCAA, which used to police recruiting violations and the like. Among this new entity's biggest functions is to analyze third-party deals worth $600 or more to make sure they are paying players an appropriate 'market value' for the services being provided. The so-called College Sports Commission promises to be quicker and more efficient than the NCAA. Schools are being asked to sign a contract saying they will abide by the rules of this new structure, even if it means going against laws passed in their individual states. Q: What about players who played before NIL was allowed? A: A key component of the settlement is the $2.7 billion in back pay going to athletes who competed between 2016-24 and were either fully or partially shut out from those payments under previous NCAA rules. That money will come from the NCAA and its conferences (but really from the schools, who will receive lower-than-normal payouts from things like March Madness). Q: Who will get most of the money? A: Since football and men's basketball are the primary revenue drivers at most schools, and that money helps fund all the other sports, it stands to reason that the football and basketball players will get most of the money. But that is one of the most difficult calculations for the schools to make. There could be Title IX equity concerns as well. Q: What about all the swimmers, gymnasts and other Olympic sports athletes? A: The settlement calls for roster limits that will reduce the number of players on all teams while making all of those players – not just a portion – eligible for full scholarships. This figures to have an outsize impact on Olympic-sport athletes, whose scholarships cost as much as that of a football player but whose sports don't produce revenue. There are concerns that the pipeline of college talent for Team USA will take a hit. Q: So, once this is finished, all of college sports' problems are solved, right? A: The new enforcement arm seems ripe for litigation. There are also the issues of collective bargaining and whether athletes should flat-out be considered employees, a notion the NCAA and schools are generally not interested in, despite Tennessee athletic director Danny White's suggestion that collective bargaining is a potential solution to a lot of headaches. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been pushing Congress for a limited antitrust exemption that would protect college sports from another series of lawsuits but so far nothing has emerged from Capitol Hill.
29 minutes ago
Could Musk-Trump feud stoke GOP divisions ahead of midterms? ANALYSIS
Even by the standards of President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk's relationship -- an unprecedented alliance punctuated by a meme-inspired reshaping of the government, numerous rocket launches, assassination attempts, a quarter-billion-dollar political gamble and electric car photo-ops -- it's been an unusual week. For months, Musk had been the closest of Trump's advisers -- even living at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and spending time with the president's family. More recently, Trump gave Musk a congratulatory Oval Office sendoff from his work leading cost-cutting efforts in his administration, giving him a golden key with a White House insignia. But the billionaire's muted criticisms of Trump's "big, beautiful bill" grew louder and more pointed, culminating in posts Thursday on his social media platform taking credit for Trump's November win and Republicans' takeover of the Senate. "Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate," Musk posted. "Such ingratitude." Some lawmakers and Republicans worry Musk's apparent acrimonious departure from Trump's orbit could create new uncertainties for the party -- and stoke GOP divisions that would not serve Republicans well heading into a critical legislative stretch before the midterm elections. The back-and-forth attacks, which continued into the weekend and took a sharply personal turn, reverberated across a capital they have both reshaped. Trump on Friday told several reporters over the phone that he was not thinking about Musk and told ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl that Musk had "lost his mind." In the near term, Trump and the GOP are trying to muscle their signature tax and domestic policy megabill through the House and Senate, with the slimmest of margins and no shortage of disagreements. Any shift on the key issues could topple the high-wire act needed to please House and Senate Republicans. A nonstop torrent of criticism from Musk's social media megaphone could collapse negotiations, harden the position of the bill's critics and even undermine other pieces of Trump's first-term agenda. "You hate seeing division and chaos," Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who represents a swing district, told ABC News about the Trump-Musk fracas. "It's not helpful." Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, called Musk a "credible voice" on "debt and spending" issues. "It's never helpful when he says those things. He's a believable person and he has a broad reach, but I think he's frustrated and people understand the context," Arrington said, predicting that both men will eventually resolve their dispute. Republican operatives watching the spat unfold this week told ABC News it is too early to say how the feud between Trump and Musk could affect the next election. The billionaire spent more than anyone else on the last election, pouring $270 million into groups boosting Trump and other Republicans up and down the ballot, according to Federal Election Commission filings. He already suggested he would cut back on his political donations next cycle, more than a year out from the midterm elections. In the final stretch of the 2024 race, he relocated to Pennsylvania, hosting town halls and bankrolling his own get-out-the-vote effort in the critical swing state. Since his foray into Washington, Musk has become a deeply polarizing and unpopular figure, while the president's approval rating has ticked up in some recent surveys. Groups affiliated with Musk spent $20 million this spring on the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, only for the liberal candidate to win -- signaling to some Republicans the limits of Musk's political pull. While his support may be missed by Republicans next cycle, Trump has continued to raise millions of dollars to support his future political plans, a remarkable sum for a term-limited president that underscores his central role in the party and undisputed kingmaker status. Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., who is mulling a gubernatorial bid in 2026, downplayed the tensions or political implications, suggesting that reporters "spend way more time worrying about these things than most average people." "I'm sure they will make peace," Lawler told ABC News on Friday. There were some signs of a détente. While Musk continued to hurl insults at Trump ally and critic Steve Bannon, his social media activity appeared to cool off on Friday, and the billionaire said one supporter was "not wrong" for saying Trump and Musk are "much stronger together than apart." Through nearly a decade in politics and three campaigns for the White House, Trump has demonstrated a remarkable ability to move past disputes or disagreements with many intraparty rivals and onetime critics, including some who now serve in his Cabinet. Now, some Republicans left Washington this week asking themselves if Musk is willing to do the same.
New York Post
29 minutes ago
- New York Post
Vance says Musk's public feud with Trump is a ‘huge mistake,' hopes billionaire ‘comes back into fold'
Vice President JD Vance said it was a huge mistake for Elon Musk to be at war with President Trump amid their escalating feud and is hopeful that the billionaire Tesla founder 'comes back into the fold.' 'Elon is entitled to his opinion,' Vance said during an interview with comedian Theo Von, which was released on Saturday. 'I'm not saying he has to agree with the bill or agree with everything that I'm saying. I just think it's a huge mistake for the world's wealthiest man — I think one of the most transformational entrepreneurs ever — to be at war with the world's most powerful man, who I think is doing more to save the country than anybody in my lifetime.' Advertisement Vance's appearance on Von's popular podcast, 'This Past Weekend w/ Theo Von,' was recorded as Trump and billionaire Musk traded barbs on social media over the latter's complaints about the Trump-backed One Big Beautiful Bill Act. 'I just think you've got to have some respect for him and say, 'yeah, we don't have to agree on every issue.' But is this war actually in the interest of the country? I don't think so,' Vance said. 'Hopefully, Elon figures it out, comes back into the fold. I know the president was getting a little frustrated, feeling like some of the criticisms were unfair coming from Elon. But I think it has been very restrained, because the president doesn't think that he needs to be in a blood feud with Elon Musk. And I actually think that if Elon chilled out a little bit everything would be fine.' Advertisement 3 Vice President JD Vance appeared on Theo Von's podcast. X/JDVance The SpaceX founder signaled support for impeaching Trump and replacing him with Vance in one of several jabs directed at the commander in chief. 'President vs Elon. Who wins? My money's on Elon. Trump should be impeached and JD Vance should replace him,' right-wing commentator Ian Miles Cheong wrote on X. To which Musk replied: 'Yes.' Advertisement Vance appears to be fully in Trump's corner amid the public spat between the two billionaires — and expressed his support of the president in an X post late Thursday night. 'President Trump has done more than any person in my lifetime to earn the trust of the movement he leads. I'm proud to stand beside him,' the veep wrote. In an earlier post, as the Trump-Musk drama was simmering down on social media, Vance had teased that he would be appearing on Von's show. 'Slow news day, what are we even going to talk about?' Vance wrote on X. Advertisement 3 President Donald Trump points at Elon Musk during a conversation inside the Oval Office of the White House on March 14, 2025. AFP via Getty Images 3 Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump and vice presidential candidate Sen. JD Vance appear on the first day of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisc. on July 15, 2024. Getty Images Musk shared the vice president's post and reacted with a laughing emoji. Von previously interviewed both Vance and Trump in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election. Trump's August 2024 appearance on Von's show racked up nearly 17 million views on YouTube. The podcaster later attended Trump's inauguration and made a surprise appearance at a US air base in Qatar, where the president spoke to service members and their families last month.
