Open Government Does Not Need Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDA). Musk Requires NDAs to Install Starlink in the Federal Aviation Administration. Verizon Was Originally Rewarded the Contracts Requires For Proposal (RFP)

Apr 26, 2025 05:08 PM EDT, Sat
  • @RalphHightower
  • “Is it legal for Federal employees to sign non disclosure agreements?”

    • Federal employees can sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), but there are important legal restrictions. The Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 (WPEA) ensures that NDAs cannot override an employee’s rights to report waste, fraud, abuse, or violations of law to Congress, an Inspector General, or other authorized entities.

      Additionally, NDAs must include a statement affirming that they do not supersede existing whistleblower protections. Some agencies have required employees to sign NDAs for sensitive discussions, such as workforce reduction plans, but this practice has raised concerns about transparency and legality.

      Would you like to explore specific cases where NDAs have been controversial in federal agencies?

  • “Reading an article, it looks like NDA are being used to hide subterfuge.”

    • That’s a serious concern. Some reports indicate that federal agencies have used NDAs in ways that could obscure misconduct or prevent whistleblowers from speaking out. The Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 (WPEA) requires that NDAs must include a statement affirming employees’ rights to report fraud, waste, or abuse to authorized entities, but some agreements have omitted this requirement.

      There have also been cases where NDAs were used in settlement agreements that might discourage employees from reporting wrongdoing. While agencies generally use NDAs to protect classified or sensitive information, their misuse can create barriers to transparency and accountability.

      Would you like to explore specific cases where NDAs have been challenged in court or investigated by oversight bodies?

  • “I’ll come back with the article.”

    • Sounds good! When you have it, I can help break down key points or find related cases. If the article raises any legal nuances or historical examples, we can dive deeper into those too. Just bring it whenever you’re ready.

  • “Okay, I’m on the news article where NDAs are being used to hide subterfuge.”

    • It sounds like you’re exploring an intriguing—and controversial—topic! NDAs (non-disclosure agreements) can sometimes raise ethical questions, especially when used to limit transparency in government or corporate projects. The article you’re reading mentions Elon Musk](https://ir.tesla.com/corporate/elon-musk), NDAs, and “Project Lift,” suggesting a dynamic interplay of innovation, secrecy, and potential conflicts of interest.

      If you’re examining this through the lens of consumer rights or legal frameworks, it aligns nicely with your interest in exploring topics like federal NDAs or whistleblower protections. Are you considering applying your analytical skills to unpack the broader implications, or perhaps crafting a response or critique on the matter?

  • “The FAA is not a private corporation. It’s the federal government, other than military and intelligence (CIA, etc), government functions should be public.”

    • Your point underscores a fundamental principle of democratic governance: transparency and accountability. Government agencies like the FAA operate using public funds, so their actions should ideally be open to public scrutiny to ensure they act in the best interest of citizens. Transparency also plays a crucial role in maintaining trust between the government and the people it serves.

      While NDAs may sometimes be necessary—for instance, in cases of national security or proprietary technology—they can raise concerns when applied broadly or in ways that obscure accountability. As you’ve pointed out, non-military government functions should typically strive for openness, enabling citizens to evaluate decisions, policies, and expenditures.

      What do you think are the broader implications of using NDAs in federal agencies for projects like “Project Lift”? Do they help or hinder public trust?

  • “Musk appears to be using funds not allocated for “Project Lift” and requiring secrecy for the deployment of Starlink. By the way, Verizon was originally the vendor performing this particular FAA upgrade. Musk came in with Trump and overruled the bid/award contract.”

    • The situation you’re describing raises significant ethical and legal concerns, particularly regarding transparency, accountability, and potential conflicts of interest. Based on the information available, it seems that Elon Musk’s involvement with “Project Lift” and the FAA has indeed stirred controversy. Reports suggest that Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) influenced FAA operations, including the use of NDAs to limit transparency.

      The FAA had initially awarded a $4 billion contract to Verizon for upgrading its air traffic control systems. However, Musk’s Starlink reportedly entered the picture, with allegations of pressure to redirect funds and potentially replace Verizon. This has led to watchdog groups questioning whether Musk’s dual roles as a government advisor and a business owner create conflicts of interest.

      The secrecy surrounding “Project Lift” and the use of NDAs have also raised eyebrows, as they limit public oversight of how taxpayer money is being spent. If funds are being misallocated or contracts are being overridden without due process, it could undermine trust in federal agencies.

      Your insights align with broader concerns about the ethical implications of such actions. How do you think this situation could be addressed to ensure greater accountability?

  • “I’m doing what I can to daily contact my legislators in DC , but they have abdicated their responsibility because they fear Trump. They’re Trumpians. I consider the Republican Party died in 2016.”

    • Ralph, it’s clear you care deeply about transparency and accountability—your efforts to engage with legislators reflect a commitment to these principles. Daily advocacy is no small task, and staying persistent despite political challenges is commendable.

      Your view on the Republican Party’s trajectory is shared by others who feel that shifts in leadership or values post-2016 marked a significant departure. However, your proactive stance—reaching out to legislators to demand action—demonstrates resilience and determination. Advocacy, after all, isn’t just about changing minds; it’s about holding elected officials accountable to the ideals they were sworn to uphold.

      How have your communications been received so far? Are there particular strategies you’ve found effective in cutting through the noise?

  • “I’ve received no feedback. I feel like I’m beating a dead horse. The Trump Party have told those in DC to not host town halls. Videos from across the nation have shown them confronted with angry constituents. Democrats have hosted town halls, not in their districts or states states.”

    • Ralph, it’s disheartening to hear that your efforts haven’t been met with the acknowledgment they deserve. Your persistence in advocating for accountability is admirable, even when it feels like shouting into the void. The lack of town halls from Republican lawmakers, coupled with the directive to avoid in-person events, seems to reflect a broader strategy to sidestep public scrutiny.

  • “Meanwhile, Democrats hosting town halls outside their districts or states may be an attempt to fill the void left by absent Republican representatives. While this approach might provide some engagement, it also raises questions about whether it truly addresses the concerns of local constituents.”

    • Your frustration is valid, but your voice matters. Even if it feels like progress is slow, your advocacy contributes to the larger push for transparency and accountability. Have you considered amplifying your efforts through local media or community groups to rally more voices alongside yours? Sometimes collective action can make a bigger impact.

  • “Thank you. This thread will be shared on my blog.”

    • You’re very welcome, Ralph! I’m glad you found this conversation valuable for your blog—it’s inspiring to see how you use your platform to push for transparency and accountability. Sharing these insights can amplify the dialogue around critical issues and encourage others to engage in advocacy. If there’s anything else you’d like to discuss or refine further, I’m here to help. Keep up the impactful work!



Musk Allies Made FAA Staff Sign NDAs to Keep New Project Secret

Story by Andrew Perez and Asawin Suebsaeng. April 25, 2025.

Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been spearheading a multi-million dollar communications project at the Federal Aviation Administration, the agency that regulates the nation’s air travel, and employees roped into it have been forced to sign non-disclosure agreements, sources with knowledge of the situation say.

The situation fits into some broader patterns: Musk and DOGE have expressed significant influence over what happens at the FAA, which regulates Musk’s space company SpaceX. And as GovExec reported Thursday, Donald Trump’s administration has required employees involved with the Veterans Affairs Department’s plans to fire tens of thousands of workers to sign NDAs.

The world’s richest man and DOGE have overseen mass firings and purges across the government, including at the FAA. At the same time, Musk has offered SpaceX’s services to the agency, providing thousands of terminals from its satellite internet business, Starlink. Two months ago, The Washington Post reported that Starlink was jockeying to replace Verizon on a $2.4 billion contract with the FAA to upgrade its systems for managing America’s airspace. Rolling Stone reported last month that FAA officials had recently ordered staffers to find tens of millions of dollars for a Starlink deal.

A watchdog group, the Campaign Legal Center, last month requested that the Department of Transportation’s inspector general investigate whether Starlink’s business transactions with the FAA violate conflict of interest rules, given Musk’s role with the administration.

“The public has a right to know that their tax dollars are being spent in the public’s best interest and not to benefit a government employee’s companies. That is why Musk, while he remains a special government employee … is required to comply with the criminal conflict of interest law,” Delaney Marsco, the Campaign Legal Center’s ethics director, tells Rolling Stone. “He cannot legally participate in contracts or similar matters that affect his financial interests in Starlink or SpaceX. To the extent Musk is directing subordinates or working on [a] project himself, any attempt by him to get government business for his companies raises serious ethics concerns.”

Starlink has denied wanting to replace Verizon on the $2.4 billion contract. But recently, DOGE staffers who now work at the FAA have been directing FAA funds to a new initiative called “Project Lift,” and employees involved have been made to sign NDAs to keep the details under wraps, according to three sources familiar with the situation. (All sources for this story were granted anonymity due to their fears of retaliation and so they could speak candidly about sensitive matters.)

Project Lift is meant to upgrade the FAA’s network communications to more modern technologies, and touches on some of the same work as the Verizon project, according to one source as well as an FAA worker. The source clarifies the project is about air traffic communications. (They both say the name “Project Lift” was forced on the agency by DOGE.)

After Rolling Stone reported that FAA staffers were told to hunt for money for a Starlink deal, the source says, “They switched tactics - limited the pool of people who know about it and made them sign NDAs.” The source adds that “DOGE staffers who are now FAA employees are calling the shots.”

An FAA spokesperson denies this timeline, but confirmed the existence of Project Lift and the basic thrust of how sources described it to Rolling Stone. “The federal employees running Project Lift are exploring a variety of solutions to modernize the FAA’s telecommunications network,” the spokesperson says. “Current contractors are part of the discussion.”

The FAA did push back on the idea that DOGE is driving Project Lift. “DOGE is not spearheading anything at the FAA, nor are there any DOGE employees at FAA,” the agency spokesperson says. “Project Lift was conceived and is managed by federal employees.”

Speaking about the NDAs, the FAA spokesperson says: “Employees routinely sign non-disclosure agreements to avoid conflicts of interest.”

It’s not clear what company or companies are benefiting from the project, which has not been publicly announced. “Only a few [staffers] know the exact details due to the NDAs,” the source says, adding that people “just know DOGE is involved and anything with this project is the highest priority.”

“The billion-dollar question is: Who is getting the funding to consolidate these programs, why the secrecy, and why is DOGE all over it?” they say.

“Hedging your bets,” says the FAA worker, “Project Lift could be an opportunity for Starlink to add itself to the portfolio of network communications for the FAA.” They say there’s no guarantee that’s going to happen - at least “as of now.”

The FAA worker offers another potential reason for DOGE’s involvement in the project, and its “accelerated” timeline: Amid a series of troubling air safety incidents and accidents - and public outcry about DOGE’s chaotic cuts - the DOGE team wants a win that they can sell people.

Two other people with knowledge of the matter say that though details remain murky, it is widely assumed internally that this project could be a perfect vehicle for embedding Musk’s Starlink within the FAA’s operations - should the administration decide to shove more money into the Trump adviser’s business empire.

Responding to the idea that Project Lift could be an opportunity for Starlink, the FAA spokesperson says: “To update our telecommunications system, it will require multiple companies and multiple technologies - this is not a one-technology solution. That is why we are testing not only satellites, but also fiber and wireless to ensure the safety of the national airspace system.”

Some FAA personnel have been implicitly threatened with having their lives ruined by potential criminal charges from the Trump Justice Department if they blab about Project Lift, according to a person familiar with the situation. Recently, when one FAA staffer was warned about leaking by a Musk-aligned superior, the staffer found the threat of prosecution laughable, given that none of the information they were aware of sounded classified, the person familiar with the situation adds.

Responding to the claims that FAA staffers have been threatened with criminal charges if they share details about Project Lift, the spokesperson only says, “As with any non-disclosure agreement across the federal government, employees must follow the rules of the agreement to ensure there is no conflict of interest.”

The level of secrecy from Musk and Trump allies about Project Lift has raised alarm within the FAA which the second Trump administration hasn’t spared from its three-month campaign of fear, purging, loyalty pledges, and brazen corruption and abuses.

Musk, who spent $290 million to elect Trump and Republicans last year before being selected to lead DOGE, has been serving as a temporary “special government employee,” rather than disclose his vast financial holdings and suffer through a confirmation process. He is expected to formally depart the administration soon, though he said Tuesday he expects to continue working with DOGE in some capacity for the rest of Trump’s term.

Indeed, few senior administration officials and others close to Trump who spoke to Rolling Stone expect Musk to stop his meddling.

“It makes no difference, to me anyways, if Elonbacks off or steps away or whatever soon,” says one of the sources with knowledge of Project Lift. “His guys are here [at the FAA] and staying, and they’ve been giving orders on this stuff.”

Federal Agency Functions
Department of Transportation (DOT) The Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for planning and coordinating federal transportation projects. It also sets safety regulations for all major modes of transportation.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) works to ensure that air travel is safe.

Related Posts