Big Money
Follow the money.
$375B EPA slush fund handled by John Podesta gave billions to charities founded only months earlier
The fund in question was for climate change initiatives.
In fund management, they talk about “moving the needle.” A large fund cannot look at a smaller investment, no matter the prospective return or the attractive risk/reward tradeoff, because it won’t have any impact. It’s the same amount of work to diligence a small investment as it is a larger one that would make a difference. Well not the same, but there are many things you need to check in both small and large situations.
A fund of this size is mammoth when you compare it to the largest private equity funds that a) do this for a living, b) have a ton of experience and market knowledge, and c) have skin-in-the-game. On this last point, if they screw up MegaFund VII LLP and end up with a bunch of bankruptcies, let alone outright fraud, they’re going to be out of business and possibly in court.
No offense to Podesta. I’m sure he’s a great guy.
There is no way to justify having a political consultant run this fund.
This headline begs the question. Everyone is just taking one assertion for granted: John Podesta was the right man for the job.
Why was Podesta running this fund? What was the actual job?
‘In one case, former Vice President Kamala Harris handed over a check for nearly $7 billion to Bethesda, Maryland, based group Climate United Fund, which does not appear in the IRS’s charities database, and has no federal filings.
‘The non-profit fund had only been incorporated in Delaware on November 30, 2023, according to public records, five months before Harris handed over the cash in April 2024.’
As DOGE looks for cuts, Cato expert suggests targeting 'corporate welfare'
Distortions on top of distortions do not make for an efficient economy.
‘As President Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency looks for places to cut spending and shrink the bureaucracy, a Cato Institute federal budget expert suggests looking to the $181 billion a year spent on "corporate welfare."
‘"Corporate welfare means business subsidies," said Chris Edwards, who is an advocate for smaller government.’
How Bureaucratic Practices Preserve Elite Multigenerational Wealth
Imposing a process to socialize the importance and seriousness of generating and managing wealth as a family is one way the rich differ from you and me. Certainly me.
‘… I argue that wealthy families adopt what I call “bureaucratic practices”—activities like meetings, presentations, and signing documents—to preserve wealth intergenerationally. After erecting legal entities such as corporations, trusts, and foundations, wealth managers help wealthy families implement bureaucratic practices. These practices, which privilege bureaucratic form over substance, constitute a crucial behavioral layer atop the legal infrastructure, facilitating a greater degree of wealth preservation compared with using entities alone. Thus, preserving wealth at the top should be understood not merely as a set of discrete transfers from parents to children, but as an enduring multigenerational process of professional socialization that introduces new behaviors into family life.’
Republicans Warn Musk DOGE Cuts at Risk Without Congress
If DOGE can work with legislators to codify cuts quickly, then they will be much more robust.
Can he? Will he?
‘The differences between Elon Musk’s fast-acting efforts to reshape the federal government and congressional Republicans’ desire for process and professional courtesies played out behind closed doors in the US Capitol, the latest sign of brewing tension among factions of President Donald Trump’s allies.
‘In a series of meetings Wednesday with Musk, House and Senate Republicans sought to impress upon the billionaire that Congress has a central role in enacting controversial spending cuts that don’t run the risk of being overturned in court.
‘Lawmakers also implored Musk for more communication — and warning — from his Department of Government Efficiency about looming cuts that could affect jobs and programs in their districts, according to a person familiar with the discussion.’
Republican Senators Question Musk on DOGE Cuts, Gently Insisting on Input
If they can figure this out, the cuts will be permanent. Advise and consent, indeed.
‘Republican senators have raised few public complaints about Mr. Musk as he has undertaken mass firings across the government without consulting or informing them. But during the nearly two-hour closed-door meeting, the senators gently questioned him about how they might share feedback, minimize blowback from their constituents and, perhaps, eventually get to vote on the cuts he is making.
‘At one point during the largely friendly exchange, Mr. Musk, who made no presentation of his own, shared his personal phone number with senators and encouraged them to reach out directly with any concerns.’
‘Review’ time: Congress looks to its own regulatory veto process
Expect to see more focus on CRA.
‘But Congress has a more targeted process available — less divisive and less subject to court challenges. It is called the Congressional Review Act of 1996. It was the brainchild of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and pert of his Contract with America in the 104th Congress.
‘Perhaps ironically, Democratic President Bill Clinton signed the measure into law, even though his regulations would most immediately be on the chopping block. He dodged that bullet — the act was never used successfully against any Clinton regulations.’