By John Figliozzi
For Sunday Opinion
If one subscribes to the skeptical notion that most — despite virtuous declarations to the contrary — act first in their own self-interest, it’s easy to discern true motives and objectives.
With the second Trump Administration, there’s no mystery.
Three key self-interests are at work – Donald Trump’s, Elon Musk’s and those of Project 2025.
TRUMP
While individually their objectives are not inherently compatible – which may determine how long this alliance persists – there appears among them agreement to at least not get in each other’s way.
Mr. Trump has been open about his.
He wants retribution for the electoral and legal harms to which he claims he’s been unfairly subjected.
He also wants his imperial propensities satisfied.
Hence, his errant conflation of loyalty to him with loyalty to our nation and its Constitution that has had and will have further legal, financial, political and social ramifications for us.
MUSK
For his part, the half-trillionaire Musk wants complete freedom from government oversight for his financial and business interests.
To this end, he bought and redirected toward his personal ambitions the social platform Twitter and “contributed” at least $250 million to $300 million (depending on various reports) toward Trump’s election.
For the latter, he gets to root out any aspect of government “interference” he perceives exists against his activities.
Apparently, a quid-pro-quo that clearly smacks of outright bribery to the naked eye isn’t because the Supreme Court has determined that political contributions are legally protected free speech.
PROJECT 2025
The third leg of this stool, proponents of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, want their plan for the drastic transformation of the federal government implemented.
Their 900-page manifesto seeks radical deconstruction of the federal bureaucracy in service to the unfettered accumulation of individual wealth and political power over the painstaking attempts to better balance both across the many segments of American society since the FDR years.
The so-called culture wars – DEI, abortion, gender — serve as handy agents of distraction by misdirecting blame for real economic inequities and genuine perceptions of political powerlessness. They have served to convince just enough of the American electorate to put the current political triumvirate in place.
None of this, though, is some secretive conspiracy. All have been fully open about their plans and intents.
FRAUD, WASTE, ABUSE
What can be characterized as sinister, however, is the framing of their activities as some pure pursuit of “fraud, waste and abuse”.
Most of us know that “fraud, waste and abuse” can be found in any large organization, public or private; and agree it should be identified and eliminated. But in this case, their justifications – even the ones that may look valid on the surface – are smokescreens.
As the satirist Jon Stewart so clearly laid out in his Daily Show last Monday night, the real “waste, fraud and abuse” lies in plain sight in the diversion of American taxpayers’ money away from their own needs to provide massive subsidies to the already rich and highly profitable pharmaceutical, defense and financial services sectors and the oil, gas and coal industries.
It’s American multinational corporations who have hoarded these and the benefits of free trade, denying American workers jobs and better wages while increasing their profit margins and stockholder returns, not the professional government workforce carrying out the laws that
Congress passes and the policies and programs it finances or the beneficiaries of DEI programs.
What are the likely effects for ordinary Americans going forward? That’s a broad topic for another day.
But while this might appear to pertain mostly to faraway Washington, it could have a devastating effect on New Yorkers.
IMPACT ON NEW YORK
Even though its taxpayers put upwards of $368 billion annually into the federal treasury, New York state needs to petition Washington for financial support of specific policies that benefit the state.
This grants the president and Congress substantial leverage over state activities.
For example, Trump has reportedly decided to eliminate congestion pricing in New York City, despite the state and city’s determination that the metropolitan area’s environment and mass transit systems will massively benefit.
The state Republican Party also has shown itself to be loyal primarily to Trump over the people of the state with issues like the SALT Federal tax deduction.
That makes it a sort of “fifth column” working against New Yorkers’ interests.
Beyond just the efforts of state politicians, it will take a more robust form of citizenship on the part of New Yorkers to have their own distinctive needs met and to defend what is ultimately the state’s sovereignty to democratically determine its own course.
But do we have that in us?
John Figliozzi is a regular contributor to the Sunday Opinion section.
