logo
Elon Musk wants to create a new political party. Building rockets may be easier

Elon Musk wants to create a new political party. Building rockets may be easier

CTV News15 hours ago
(Elon Musk looks on during a news conference with U.S. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office on May 30. Allison Robbert/AFP/Getty Images via CNN Newsource)
Elon Musk has started multiple successful companies that have accomplished incredible technological feats. His latest ambition may be significantly more difficult to achieve: starting a new American political party for the masses.
Citing his disappointment in U.S. President Donald Trump and his massively expensive domestic policy bill, Musk said he would form the 'America party' the day after the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' passes, if Congress approves it. Musk has called Democrats and Republicans the 'uniparty' because government deficits have risen dramatically under administrations and Congresses controlled by both parties. He says he wants to build a fiscally conservative party that reins in spending – although he's presented few other details of what the party's platform might be.
Experts in campaign finance and political science say there's a reason no third party has ever truly successfully challenged America's two-party system: It is financially and legally difficult to create a new party, and voters and candidates are hesitant to join.
'Third-party movements in the US have generally arisen out of some sort of set of deep-seated grievances,' Emory University political science professor Alan Abramowitz told CNN. 'It was not just some wealthy person who's decided they wanted to start a third party.'
It's not clear how much if any preparation has been done to stand up the party. A spokesperson for Musk's political action committee, America PAC, declined to comment.
A senior White House official brushed off Musk's criticism of the bill. 'No one really cares what he says anymore,' the source said.
Two Republicans close to the White House said that it was also unclear how Musk's threats might play out in the midterm elections.
'Of course, members don't want to be primaried,' one of the sources said. 'It's unclear if he's actually going to get involved. A few weeks ago he apologized and called Trump.'
Musk may be the richest person on Earth, but he could also encounter some financial resistance himself. Former DOGE adviser and Trump supporter James Fishback said he is launching his own super PAC to counter Musk's money in congressional races.
Fishback, who runs an investment firm, said he will provide $1 million in initial funding to the super PAC, which will be called FSD PAC, an abbreviation for Full Support for Donald.
He told CNN that the super PAC will work to back Trump's agenda 'and against anyone who threatens to sabotage that agenda,' including Musk.
Legal hurdles
American political parties are governed by laws and rules not just from the Federal Election Commission but also from the states, including around which parties can appear on ballots.
'The system is sort of set up to almost make it impossible for third parties to be successful,' Abramowitz said.
Funding a new party has its own hurdles. The McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2022 set strict limits on donations to political parties. The current limit is just under $450,000 spread across different party purposes. Musk would need thousands of co-donors to help him fund his party, said Lee Goodman, an attorney and former chair of the FEC.
'One very wealthy individual cannot capitalize a new national political party, the way he might start a business, because of federal contribution limits,' Goodman told CNN. 'The prospect of a wealthy founder seed funding a national party to participate in federal elections around the country is not feasible in the current regulatory system.'
Bradley Smith, another former FEC chair and who is now a law professor at Capital University Law School, said there are some ways around the current regulations.
'There is some case law suggesting that some of the organizational activities of a party and starting a party right can be funded with larger contributions, until it actually qualifies for party status under the election commission regulations,' Smith said, but he noted it's complex and difficult to do.
'You can fund super PACs all you want. But you can't fund a political party, as a strange part of American law,' he added.
Super PACs are not legally allowed to coordinate spending with parties or candidates, although previous candidates have tested these limits, as nothing prohibits coordination when the information is shared publicly. 'Coordination has, in fact, become commonplace,' the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center has said.
Then there's getting on the actual ballots. States have different rules, such as requiring a certain number of signatures.
'It would take years and might require changes in laws around the country that currently favor two major political parties,' Goodman noted
Political hurdles
Beyond the legal and logistical hurdles, there's convincing candidates to join and voters to cast their ballots for them.
Despite varying approval levels, party loyalties remain strong, Abramowitz said, especially among Republicans, who have coalesced around Trump.
'The biggest obstacle is just that it's very difficult to convince people to vote for a third-party candidate because the argument is always 'you're wasting your vote. You're voting for someone who has no chance of winning elections,'' Abramowitz said.
Candidates may also be wary. Democrats are unlikely to run under the America Party because 'Democrats hate Elon Musk,' Abramowitz said. And Republicans 'have clearly shown that they're much more attached to Donald Trump than they are to Elon Musk.'
Republicans highly approve of Trump, according to CNN Chief Data Analyst Harry Enten's aggregation of available polling data. Some 90 precent of Republicans approve of Trump's performance thus far in this presidency, and he is doing better in approval ratings five months into the presidency than former Republican presidents. And in 96 per cent of the 2024 primary races where Trump endorsed, those candidates won.
If creating a new political party proves too difficult, Musk could still hold a lot of sway through his super PAC, to which he can send unlimited funds. That PAC can then support independent candidates, who could also have an easier time getting on ballots.
'Independent spending, individually or via a super PAC, remains the most legal and practical mechanism for a wealthy individual to have a say in national politics,' Goodman said.
Article written by Hadas Gold, CNN
CNN's Kristen Holmes and Fredreka Schouten contributed reporting.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump will kick off a yearlong celebration of America's 250th anniversary with event in Iowa
Trump will kick off a yearlong celebration of America's 250th anniversary with event in Iowa

Toronto Star

time33 minutes ago

  • Toronto Star

Trump will kick off a yearlong celebration of America's 250th anniversary with event in Iowa

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to deliver a 'spectacular' yearlong birthday party to mark 250 years of American independence. On Thursday, he will be in the U.S. heartland to kick off the patriotic festivities leading up to next year's anniversary. The event at the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines will feature 'dazzling' displays of Americana and American history, musical performances and a fireworks show to cap the night, said U.S. Ambassador Monica Crowley, Trump's liaison to the organizing group, America250.

Man charged with killing former Minnesota House speaker Melissa Hortman due back in court after delay
Man charged with killing former Minnesota House speaker Melissa Hortman due back in court after delay

Globe and Mail

timean hour ago

  • Globe and Mail

Man charged with killing former Minnesota House speaker Melissa Hortman due back in court after delay

The man charged with killing former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, and wounding a state senator and his wife, is due back in federal court Thursday for a hearing that was put on hold after his lawyer said his client had been unable to sleep while on suicide watch. The hearing is expected to address whether Vance Boelter should remain in custody without bail and affirm that there is probable cause to proceed with the case. He's not expected to enter a plea. Prosecutors need to secure a grand jury indictment first, before his arraignment, which is when a plea is normally entered. An unshaven Boelter, 57, of Green Isle, was wearing a green padded suicide prevention suit and orange slippers when he was brought into court last Friday. Federal defender Manny Atwal then asked Magistrate Judge Douglas Micko to continue the hearing. She said Boelter had been sleep deprived due to harsh conditions in the Sherburne County Jail, making it difficult for them to communicate. 'Your honour, I haven't really slept in about 12 to 14 days,' Boelter told the judge then. And he denied being suicidal. 'I've never been suicidal and I am not suicidal now.' Biden, Harris and Walz attend funeral for and honour former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman Minnesota shooting suspect had dozens of potential targets, prosecutors say Sherburne County Sheriff Joel Brott, whose jail houses both county and federal prisoners, rejected Boelter's claims of poor conditions as absurd. 'He is not in a hotel. He's in jail, where a person belongs when they commit the heinous crimes he is accused of committing,' Brott said in a statement Friday. Boelter faces separate cases in federal and state court on charges of murder and attempted murder for what the state's chief federal prosecutor, Acting U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson, has called 'a political assassination' and 'a chilling attack on our democracy.' The feds are going first. Authorities say Hortman and her husband, Mark, were shot to death in their home in the Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Park in the early hours of June 14 by a man disguised as a police officer who was driving a fake squad car. Boelter also allegedly shot and seriously wounded state Sen. John Hoffman, and his wife, Yvette, earlier that morning at their home in nearby Champlin. The Hoffmans are recovering, but Hortman's golden retriever, Gilbert, was seriously injured and had to be euthanized. Boelter surrendered near his home the night of June 15 after what authorities called the largest search in Minnesota history, a hunt of around 40 hours. Atwal told the court last week that Boelter had been kept in what's known as a 'Gumby suit,' without undergarments, ever since his first court appearance June 16. She said the lights were on in his area 24 hours a day, doors slammed frequently, the inmate in the next cell would spread feces on the walls, and the smell would drift to Boelter's cell. The attorney said transferring him to segregation instead, and giving him a normal jail uniform, would let him get some sleep, restore some dignity, and let him communicate better. The judge granted the delay. Boelter's lawyers have declined to comment on the charges themselves, which could carry the federal death penalty. Thompson has said no decision has been made whether to seek it. Minnesota abolished its death penalty in 1911. But Attorney General Pam Bondi has said from the start that the Trump administration will be more aggressive in seeking capital punishment. Prosecutors allege Boelter also stopped at the homes of two other Democratic lawmakers. They also say he listed dozens of other Democrats as potential targets, including officials in other states. Friends described Boelter as an evangelical Christian with politically conservative views. But prosecutors have declined so far to speculate on a motive. Former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris joined the mourners at the Hortmans' funeral last Saturday. Gov. Tim Walz, Harris's running mate on the 2024 Democratic presidential ticket, eulogized Hortman as 'the most consequential speaker in Minnesota history.' Hortman served as speaker from 2019 until January. She then yielded the post to a Republican in a power-sharing deal after the House became tied in the 2024 elections, and became speaker emerita.

How a GOP rift over tech regulation doomed a ban on state AI laws in Trump's tax bill
How a GOP rift over tech regulation doomed a ban on state AI laws in Trump's tax bill

Winnipeg Free Press

timean hour ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

How a GOP rift over tech regulation doomed a ban on state AI laws in Trump's tax bill

NEW YORK (AP) — A controversial bid to deter states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade seemed on its way to passing as the Republican tax cut and spending bill championed by President Donald Trump worked its way through the U.S. Senate. But as the bill neared a final vote, a relentless campaign against it by a constellation of conservatives — including Republican governors, lawmakers, think tanks and social groups — had been eroding support. One, conservative activist Mike Davis, appeared on the show of right-wing podcaster Steve Bannon, urging viewers to call their senators to reject this 'AI amnesty' for 'trillion-dollar Big Tech monopolists.' He said he also texted with Trump directly, advising the president to stay neutral on the issue despite what Davis characterized as significant pressure from White House AI czar David Sacks, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and others. Conservatives passionate about getting rid of the provision had spent weeks fighting others in the party who favored the legislative moratorium because they saw it as essential for the country to compete against China in the race for AI dominance. The schism marked the latest and perhaps most noticeable split within the GOP about whether to let states continue to put guardrails on emerging technologies or minimize such interference. In the end, the advocates for guardrails won, revealing the enormous influence of a segment of the Republican Party that has come to distrust Big Tech. They believe states must remain free to protect their citizens against potential harms of the industry, whether from AI, social media or emerging technologies. 'Tension in the conservative movement is palpable,' said Adam Thierer of the R Street Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank. Thierer first proposed the idea of the AI moratorium last year. He noted 'the animus surrounding Big Tech' among many Republicans. 'That was the differentiating factor.' Conservative v. conservative in a last-minute fight The Heritage Foundation, children's safety groups and Republican state lawmakers, governors and attorneys general all weighed in against the AI moratorium. Democrats, tech watchdogs and some tech companies opposed it, too. Sensing the moment was right on Monday night, Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who opposed the AI provision and had attempted to water it down, teamed up with Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington to suggest striking the entire proposal. By morning, the provision was removed in a 99-1 vote. The whirlwind demise of a provision that initially had the backing of House and Senate leadership and the White House disappointed other conservatives who felt it gave China, a main AI competitor, an advantage. Ryan Fournier, chairman of Students for Trump and chief marketing officer of the startup Uncensored AI, had supported the moratorium, writing on X that it 'stops blue states like California and New York from handing our future to Communist China.' 'Republicans are that way … I get it,' he said in an interview, but added there needs to be 'one set of rules, not 50' for AI innovation to be successful. AI advocates fear a patchwork of state rules Tech companies, tech trade groups, venture capitalists and multiple Trump administration figures had voiced their support for the provision that would have blocked states from passing their own AI regulations for years. They argued that in the absence of federal standards, letting the states take the lead would leave tech innovators mired in a confusing patchwork of rules. Lutnick, the commerce secretary, posted that the provision 'makes sure American companies can develop cutting-edge tech for our military, infrastructure, and critical industries — without interference from anti-innovation politicians.' AI czar Sacks had also publicly supported the measure. After the Senate passed the bill without the AI provision, the White House responded to an inquiry for Sacks with the president's position, saying Trump 'is fully supportive of the Senate-passed version of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill.' Acknowledging defeat of his provision on the Senate floor, Cruz noted how pleased China, liberal politicians and 'radical left-wing groups' would be to hear the news. But Blackburn pointed out that the federal government has failed to pass laws that address major concerns about AI, such as keeping children safe and securing copyright protections. 'But you know who has passed it?' she said. 'The states.' Conservatives want to win the AI race, but disagree on how Conservatives distrusting Big Tech for what they see as social media companies stifling speech during the COVID-19 pandemic and surrounding elections said that tech companies shouldn't get a free pass, especially on something that carries as much risk as AI. Many who opposed the moratorium also brought up preserving states' rights, though proponents countered that AI issues transcend state borders and Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. Eric Lucero, a Republican state lawmaker in Minnesota, noted that many other industries already navigate different regulations established by both state and local jurisdictions. 'I think everyone in the conservative movement agrees we need to beat China,' said Daniel Cochrane from the Heritage Foundation. 'I just think we have different prescriptions for doing so.' Many argued that in the absence of federal legislation, states were best positioned to protect citizens from the potential harms of AI technology. 'We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous,' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on X. A call for federal rules Another Republican, Texas state Sen. Angela Paxton, wrote to Cruz and his counterpart, Sen. John Cornyn, urging them to remove the moratorium. She and other conservatives said some sort of federal standard could help clarify the landscape around AI and resolve some of the party's disagreements. Wednesdays Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture. But with the moratorium dead and Republicans holding only narrow majorities in both chambers of Congress, it's unclear whether they will be able to agree on a set of standards to guide the development of the burgeoning technology. In an email to The Associated Press, Paxton said she wants to see limited federal AI legislation 'that sets some clear guardrails' around national security and interstate commerce, while leaving states free to address issues that affect their residents. 'When it comes to technology as powerful and potentially dangerous as AI, we should be cautious about silencing state-level efforts to protect consumers and children,' she said. ___ Associated Press writer Matt Brown in Washington contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store