Milwaukee's Hoan Bridge looking out toward Lake Michigan. (Photo by Henry Redman/Wisconsin Examiner)

Kayakers on Wisconsin’s Lake Superior coastline rely on data collected by buoys operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to determine if conditions are safe enough for a weekend paddle or if the swells and wind could spell danger on a lake famous for wrecking much larger watercraft. 

Surfers in Sheboygan use buoys on Lake Michigan to figure out if the city is living up to its name as the “Malibu of the Midwest” on a given day. Anglers on the shores and on the ice all over the lakes rely on the buoy data to track fish populations.

Freighters sailing from Duluth, Minnesota and Superior use NOAA data to track weather patterns and ice coverage. 

Wisconsin’s maritime economy provides nearly 50,000 jobs and nearly $3 billion to the state’s gross domestic product, according to a 2024 NOAA report, but in the first month of the administration of President Donald Trump, the agency is being threatened. 

The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee’s School of Freshwater Sciences, UW-Madison’s Sea Grant and UW Extension’s National Estuarine Research Reserve use funds through NOAA grant programs to study the state’s two Great Lakes. 

Faculty at universities across the state receive NOAA money to study weather forecasting, severe droughts and precipitation on the Pacific Ocean. NOAA helps the state Department of Administration manage more than 1,000 miles of coastline and funds local efforts to control erosion and prevent flooding. A previous NOAA project worked with the state’s Native American tribes to study manoomin, also known as wild rice, to help maintain the plant that is sacred to the tribes and plays an important ecological role. 

All of that research could be at risk if cuts are made at NOAA. 

Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) — named for an internet meme of a shiba inu (a breed of Japanese hunting dog) first made popular more than a decade ago — has set its sights on NOAA. In early February, staffers with DOGE entered NOAA’s offices seeking access to its IT system, the Guardian reported. A week later, the outlet reported that scientists at the agency would need to gain approval from a Trump appointee before communicating with foreign nationals. The agency has been asked to identify climate change-related grant projects.

To run the agency, Trump has nominated Neil Jacobs as NOAA administrator. Jacobs was cited for misconduct after he and other officials put pressure on NOAA scientists to alter forecasts about 2019’s Hurricane Dorian in a scandal that became known as “Sharpiegate.” Trump has also nominated Taylor Jordan as the assistant Secretary of Commerce overseeing NOAA. Jordan previously worked as a lobbyist for private weather forecasting agencies that would benefit from the dismantling of NOAA — which runs the National Weather Service. 

A suggested Trump administration plan for NOAA was laid out in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 blueprint. The plan calls for NOAA to “be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories,” because it has “become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity.” 

Sara Hudson, the city of Ashland’s director of parks and recreation, says the community is dependent on Lake Superior year round and funding from NOAA helps the city manage its coastline. She says the city has about $1.2 million in grant funding that could be affected by cuts at NOAA. The city’s total 2024-25 budget is about $2.4 million. 

“With the funding that Ashland has, we really don’t have a lot of access to be able to do coastal resiliency or coastal management projects,” she says. “So we rely on grants to be able to do extra.” Among the affected projects, she says, could be  coastal resiliency projects that help maintain public access to a waterfront trail along Lake Superior, projects to help improve water quality including the Bay City Creek project and work on invasive species and promoting native species within public lands.

Even if Trump and Musk are trying to erase climate change research from NOAA’s mandate, the effect of a warming climate could have dire consequences for Ashland’s lake-based economy, according to Hudson. Hundreds of businesses on Lake Superior can’t survive if the tourism season ends in the fall. 

“For a community that relies on winter and every year sees less winter, economically it could be devastating,” Hudson says. “We need to have tourism 12 months out of the year. And if our winters go away, that really, that’s going to be a pivot to us. But our winter … that’s the only way our businesses can stay alive here.” 

The Great Lakes provide drinking water for about 40 million people across the United States and Canada. Organizations like the National Estuarine Research Reserve are funded by NOAA to help make sure that water is healthy. 

“We’re doing things like tracking algae blooms and changes in water quality that are really important for tourism and fishing and drinking water,” Deanna Erickson, the research reserve’s director, says. “On Lake Superior we’re working in rural communities on flood emergencies and emergency management and coastal erosion; 70% of the reserve’s operational funding comes through NOAA, and that’s matched with state funds. So in Superior, Wisconsin, that’s, you know, a pretty big economic impact here we have about a million dollars in funding for our operations.”

Eric Peace, vice president of the Ohio-based Lake Carriers Association, says that cuts to NOAA could have drastic effects on Great Lakes shipping because the data collected by the agency is crucial to navigating the lakes safely.

“On Lake Michigan, those buoys are critical to navigation safety, because what they do is provide real time data on wind, waves, current water temperatures, etc,” he says. “And our captains use those extensively to avoid storms and to find places to transit and leave.” 

Further north on Lake Superior, real-time reports on water conditions are crucial because of how dangerous the lake can get.

“I was stationed on a buoy tender in Alaska, and I’d take the 30-footers that you get up there over the 10-footers you get on Lake Superior, because they’re so close together here,” says Peace, who spent more than 20 years in the U.S. Coast Guard. “They’re all wind-driven, and they’re dangerous. Couple that with icing and everything else, you have a recipe for disaster.”

The DOGE mandate for NOAA scientists to stop communicating with foreign nationals could have a significant impact on Great Lakes shipping because the agency coordinates with the Coast Guard and a Canadian agency to track ice conditions on the Great Lakes. 

“That is one area that would be detrimental,” Peace says. “We wouldn’t have that ice forecasting from the Canadians. We would have to assume control of that completely for our own sake.”

U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin recently introduced a bipartisan bill with a group of senators from seven other Great Lakes states to increase funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. The initiative involves 12 federal agencies, including NOAA, to keep the lakes clean. In a statement, Baldwin said she’d work to fight against any efforts that would harm Wisconsin’s Great Lakes. 

“Republicans are slashing support for our veterans, cancer research, and now, they are coming after resources that keep our Great Lakes clean and open for business — all to find room in the budget to give their billionaire friends a tax break,” she said. “Wisconsin communities, farmers, and businesses rely on our Great Lakes, and I’ll stand up to any efforts that will hurt them and their way of life.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Sen. Chris Van Hollen, left, D-Md., and Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., right, speak to a crowd gathered at the shuttered Washington, D.C., headquarters of the U.S. Agency for International Development on Feb. 3, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Democratic members of Congress were denied entry Monday to the U.S. Agency for International Development, after billionaire Elon Musk, empowered by President Donald Trump, worked to close the nation’s humanitarian arm.

Senators and House members rallied outside the agency’s shuttered headquarters in Washington, D.C., vowing to fight Musk’s actions over the weekend. That included sending individuals from Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to forcefully access USAID’s computer systems and files.

“We are not going to let this injustice happen. Congress created this agency with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and if you want to change it, you got to change that law,” Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia told a large crowd that gathered outside the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, where the agency is housed.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen told a swarm of journalists and USAID employees that the Trump administration’s action against USAID was “illegal” and that he had been speaking to lawyers over the weekend.

“This is a clear violation of our law,” the Maryland Democrat told the crowd, which was dotted with homemade protest signs reading “USAID Must Be Saved” and “USAID Saves Lives.”

Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii, who also joined the press conference, announced afterward that he would place a blanket hold on all of Trump’s State Department nominees going forward.

Connolly, Van Hollen, Schatz and several other Democratic lawmakers, including Reps. Jamie Raskin and Johnny Olszewski of Maryland, Don Beyer of Virginia, and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, were denied entry to USAID’s office following the outdoor press conference.

Employees received emails and text blasts telling them not to report to the building Monday.

Agency manages $40B in U.S. spending

The workforce of roughly 10,000 — two-thirds of which work overseas — manages projects and distributes funds that reach approximately 130 countries. The agency was appropriated roughly $40 billion in fiscal year 2023.

The agency, by statute, is an “independent establishment” and “under direct authority and policy guidance of the Secretary of State,” according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

Speaking to reporters in El Salvador Monday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he is now the acting administrator for USAID.

Rubio told reporters that USAID “is involved in programs that run counter to what we’re trying to do in our national strategy” in any given country.

“It’s been 20 or 30 years where people have tried to reform it, and it refuses to reform, it refuses to cooperate,” Rubio said.

Early Monday, Musk said during a live conversation on X Spaces that Trump “agreed we should shut it down,” The Associated Press reported. Recordings of live X Spaces are not automatically publicly available afterward. Musk was joined by GOP Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa and Mike Lee of Utah during the live chat.

The agency’s website, USAID.gov, and its X social media account went dark Saturday.

Democrats demand update from Rubio

Individuals identifying themselves as DOGE personnel entered USAID headquarters over the weekend to access the agency’s computers and files, CNN reported. At least two USAID security officials were put on administrative leave after initially refusing to grant access.

Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office establishing DOGE for the purposes of “modernizing Federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.”

Democrats on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations have asked Rubio for an “immediate update” on who accessed USAID’s system and files on Saturday and whether they reviewed classified and personally identifiable information.

“While some of the individuals purported to have security clearances, it is unclear whether those who accessed secure classified facilities had proper clearance or what they were seeking to access. We understand that the security guards present at the facility were threatened when they raised questions,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s top Democrat, wrote in a letter co-signed by all Democrats on the panel.

Shaheen said the committee, which has jurisdiction over monitoring international aid, was not notified that Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency was planning to visit USAID’s headquarters.

“Following this incident, the senior management of the Office of Security, which secures USAID personnel and facilities and safeguards national security information, were placed on administrative leave. The potential access of sensitive, even classified, files, which may include the personally identifiable information (PII) of Americans working with USAID, and this incident as a whole, raises deep concerns about the protection and safeguarding of matters related to U.S. national security,” Shaheen wrote.

DOGE representative Katie Miller wrote on X Sunday that “No classified material was accessed without proper security clearances.”

Trump told journalists Sunday that USAID is “run by radical lunatics, and we’re getting them out and we’ll make a decision.”

In a post on his social media platform X Sunday, Musk wrote that the agency is “a criminal organization.”

States Newsroom reached out to the White House and the State Department for comment.

Just hours into his presidency, Trump signed an executive order to halt foreign assistance programs for 90 days.

Work stops at consumer finance watchdog

Newly installed U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has ordered the stoppage of numerous activities at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Rulemaking, enforcement actions, litigation and public communication are now halted, according to a memo from Bessent to employees that was obtained by NPR and Politico.

Trump appointed Bessent as the bureau’s acting director after dismissing its former head, Rohit Chopra, a Biden appointee.

The independent bureau within the Federal Reserve system was established by Congress in 2010 as a safeguard for consumers following the Great Recession.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk , right, co-chair of the newly announced Department of Government Efficiency, carries his son on his shoulders at the U.S. Capitol following a meeting with businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, left, the other co-chair of the Department of Government Efficiency, Rep. Kat Cammack, center, and other members of Congress on Dec. 5, 2024 in Washington, D.C. Musk and Ramaswamy met with lawmakers about DOGE, a planned presidential advisory commission with the goal of cutting government spending and increasing efficiency in the federal workforce. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump enlisted Washington outsiders Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to tell members of Congress how they should run things.

But Musk and Ramaswamy as they build their Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, don’t actually hold any elected or bureaucratic positions in the federal government — giving two hard-driving businessmen far less authority than they’re used to having in the private sector.

The duo will need to garner support from hundreds of members of Congress for any of their suggested spending cuts to become law, even with Republicans in control of the White House and both chambers of Congress. That is an uphill slog many have failed at before.

The mix of personalities, differing committee jurisdictions and separation of powers laid out in the Constitution could create tension, to say the least, when powerful Republican lawmakers disagree with or outright ignore Musk and Ramaswamy. Several Republicans indicated in interviews with States Newsroom that they intend to listen to the DOGE duo but will not back down from their roles as elected representatives of the people.

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, the incoming chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, said during a brief interview she believes the two men can offer lawmakers “valuable insights” and advice, but cautioned the power of the purse rests with Congress.

“It doesn’t mean that we will take all of these issues, but it’s always helpful to have additional oversight,” Collins said. “And so I look forward to seeing what they come up with.”

Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, chairman of the Budget Committee, summed up Democrats’ views on the Musk-Ramaswamy entity in a social media post.

“What does Doggie (“DOGE”) do? Maybe think of it this way: you have to watch a couple of precocious toddlers for the day,” Whitehouse wrote. “They need activities, but you don’t want them near stoves, cars, electrical equipment, or anything operational.”

Meet the appropriators

In Congress, the Appropriations Committee is tasked with drafting the dozen annual government funding bills that total about $1.7 trillion. The legislation funds the vast majority of federal departments and agencies, including Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior, Justice, State and Transportation.

The other two-thirds of federal spending covers interest payments on the debt, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Idaho GOP Rep. Mike Simpson, chairman of the Interior-Environment Subcommittee, told States Newsroom he expects there will be “conflict” between Congress and the Musk-Ramaswamy group, in part, because they don’t have the years, or even decades, of experience learning the ins and outs of federal spending that appropriators hold.

“I noticed that they’ve said that they want to defund public television. I think they might get some kickback on that,” Simpson said. “To me, that’s a policy decision, not an efficiency issue.”

When GOP lawmakers met with Musk and Ramaswamy behind closed doors in early December to talk about government spending, Simpson said, the two pressed the idea that Trump should be able to cancel spending he deems “waste.”

But what Trump might consider unnecessary could be an essential program to a GOP lawmaker or a rural community, Simpson said.

There’s also a federal law called the Impoundment Control Act that prevents presidents from halting funding that Congress has approved and a Supreme Court ruling that bars the president from using line-item vetoes.

Arkansas Republican Rep. Steve Womack, chairman of the Transportation-HUD Subcommittee, told States Newsroom he expects there will need to be some “deconfliction” once Musk and Ramaswamy release their proposals.

“There will be a lot of different, competing interests and ideas, and we’ll just have to see what those are,” Womack said. “It’s a little premature, but, yeah, I’m sure there’ll be some deconfliction, there’ll be some negotiating. Some of this will be leveraged with other significant emotional events up here like debt ceiling, or funding the government.”

Floor votes could also be a hurdle for the various DOGE groups if they don’t gain Democratic support. Republicans will hold just 220 seats in the House at the start of the 119th Congress before a few of their members depart for other opportunities. That razor-thin margin means proposals from Musk and Ramaswamy will need support from the full spectrum of GOP lawmakers to pass.

Then they’ll need to gain the support of nearly all 53 GOP senators if they expect any spending cuts proposals to become law through the complex budget reconciliation process. 

Proving their value

One of the many challenges for Musk and Ramaswamy will be showcasing how their efforts differ from those of the White House budget office.

Bipartisan Policy Center Managing Director for Economic Policy Rachel Snyderman said in an interview with States Newsroom she’ll be watching closely to see whether Musk and Ramaswamy integrate their proposals with the president’s budget request, which the White House will likely release sometime in the spring.

That massive document tells Congress how the president wants lawmakers to change tax and spending policy. Congress, however, rarely follows it to the letter and often ignores large swaths of it.

If Musk and Ramaswamy’s proposals go a completely different route, it could create confusion about what exactly it is the Trump administration wants lawmakers to do and could bog down any support they might get on Capitol Hill.

But simply mirroring what’s already in the budget request would lead to a question about whether or not Musk and Ramaswamy serve any real purpose.

“If you go back and look at the budgets from Trump’s first term … they averaged about $1.6 trillion in cuts over a 10-year budget window,” Snyderman said. “And at least for the first two years, those were presented to a GOP trifecta as well and not implemented as policy.”

Snyderman said Musk and Ramaswamy will likely want to do something other than reinvent the wheel by simply republishing the hundreds of government efficiency and spending cuts proposed over the years by the Congressional Budget Office, the Government Accountability Office and inspectors general.

Those groups have given lawmakers and presidents plenty of recommendations to reduce waste, fraud and abuse. But government officials don’t always act on their suggestions.

“There have been so many resources over the years doing just this — proposing smart, sensible, but tough pills to swallow when it comes to government efficiency,” Snyderman said. “What I think it’s going to really boil down to is what’s politically palatable through legislative or executive action. And where as a nation we’re willing to make those trade-offs in service to improve our fiscal outlook and trying to get a handle on the national debt.”

One of the more recent examples, she said, was the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s release of a detailed, 116-page report on ways that lawmakers could reduce the deficit in mid-December.

Impoundment law

If Republicans disagree with Musk and Ramaswamy’s suggestions or only put a few of them in place, it could lead Trump to try to cut spending unilaterally.

Such a decision would create considerable issues for Republicans, since it would violate the Impoundment Control Act and potentially set a new precedent that future Democratic presidents could use to ignore Congress on conservative spending priorities.

That Impoundment Control Act, enacted after then-President Richard Nixon refused to spend billions approved by lawmakers, essentially says a president must distribute money Congress has approved for various federal departments and agencies. It also gives the president a couple of paths to ask lawmakers to cut spending they’ve already approved, but they must agree.

Russ Vought, who has been nominated as director of the Office of Management and Budget, is likely to press the belief that presidents can unilaterally cancel spending, often called “impoundment.”

The Center for Renewing America, the think tank Vought established following his stint as OMB director during the first Trump administration, has repeatedly argued the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional and published a detailed history of how presidents canceled spending before the 1974 law took effect.

The Trump administration ignoring the ICA would likely lead to legal challenges and eventually a Supreme Court ruling.

Checks and balances

North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven, the top Republican on the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, told States Newsroom some of the government efficiency proposals that Musk and Ramaswamy pursue will be able to move through executive action, but said any spending cuts must go through Congress.

“This is a country of 320 million people that all have a different point of view about all these different issues, which is why you’ve got to have the kind of process we have, the checks and balances and all that — to figure out where is there enough support to implement these recommendations,” Hoeven said. “That’s how the system works because you’re talking about something that’s very far-reaching and it’s going to affect people throughout the country.”

Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, the top Republican on the Military Construction-VA spending subcommittee, said he expects there will be a lot of communication between lawmakers, Musk and Ramaswamy about constitutional authority to try to avoid public disagreements, though he didn’t rule that out.

“I think as long as the communication lines are open, we should hopefully end most of that,” he said.

Incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said during a press conference he expects it will take some time for Musk and Ramaswamy to “scrutinize government operations and figure out where we can achieve savings and efficiencies” before Congress reviews those recommendations and puts them in a bill.

Thune said he would like to see some of those move through the budget reconciliation process that Republicans are planning to use to get around the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster; essentially allowing the GOP to move sweeping policy changes without Democratic input.  

More cooks in Congress

Republicans have talked about cutting government spending for decades, but haven’t used unified control of government to make significant structural reforms in quite some time.

Newly formed groups in the House and Senate will likely provide some support for Musk and Ramaswamy’s proposals, but they may disagree with them as well, or come up with completely separate ideas.

The combination of Musk and Ramaswamy’s DOGE, a soon-to-be-formed House Oversight subcommittee on government efficiency chaired by Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and the government efficiency caucus could become a too-many-cooks scenario.

The Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency Caucus already holds several Republican lawmakers among its ranks, but it doesn’t have the jurisdiction that the Appropriations Committee holds. Neither does the Oversight subcommittee.

Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst established the caucus alongside Florida Rep. Aaron Bean and Texas Rep. Pete Sessions

North Carolina’s Ted Budd, Texans John Cornyn and Ted Cruz, Oklahoma’s James Lankford, Utah’s Mike Lee, Kansan Roger Marshall, Ohio’s Bernie Moreno, Missouri’s Eric Schmitt, Florida’s Rick Scott and Alaska’s Dan Sullivan have all joined the group on the Senate side.

House members include Rick Allen of Georgia, Jim Baird of Indiana, Andy Barr of Kentucky, Stephanie Bice of Oklahoma, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma, Ben Cline of Virginia, Jeff Duncan of South Carolina, Ron Estes of Kansas, Pat Fallon of Texas, Randy Feenstra of Iowa, Scott Franklin of Florida, Carlos Giménez of Florida, Glenn Grothman of Wisconsin, Diana Harshbarger of Tennessee, Doug LaMalfa of California, Nick Langworthy of New York, Debbie Lesko of Arizona, Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, Celeste Maloy of Utah, Tom McClintock of California, Cory Mills of Florida, Dan Newhouse of Washington, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Gary Palmer of Alabama, David Rouzer of North Carolina, Mike Rulli of Ohio, Maria Elvira Salazar of Florida, Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, Beth Van Duyne of Texas, Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin, Tim Walberg of Michigan, Randy Weber of Texas, Daniel Webster of Florida, Roger Williams of Texas and Joe Wilson of South Carolina. 

Dogecoin. In the week after the 2024 presidential election, the coin’s value jumped 250%. (Image: Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Rockets aren’t the only thing Elon Musk is sending into the stratosphere.

After a three-year plummet, dogecoin is blasting off again, jumping 250% since the election of Donald Trump – part of a broader wave of optimism in the industry, due to Trump’s courting of crypto advocates during his campaign.

Trump’s informal appointment of Musk to what he calls the Department of Government Efficiency – D.O.G.E for short – also helped pump the dog-themed meme coin.

This isn’t the first time Musk, who styles himself as “the Dogefather,” has fueled interest in dogecoin.

In May 2021, its price shot up in anticipation of Musk’s guest appearance on “Saturday Night Live.” During one skit, Musk played a financial analyst in conversation with a Weekend Update host, who repeatedly asked him, “What is dogecoin?” After some obfuscation, Musk’s character finally admitted that it was a hustle. The price of the coin went into a freefall. Just over a year later, it had shed over 90% of its peak value.

The losses hit small investors hard. In 2022, one of them filed a class action lawsuit against Musk for market manipulation and insider trading, though the case was dismissed in August 2024.

Why has dogecoin – a meme coin that was never meant to be taken seriously as an investment – seen such extreme swings in value?

We’re all in this together

Dogecoin was launched in 2013 to spoof bitcoin and a slew of other cryptocurrencies that were claiming to disrupt the traditional world of finance. Two strangers from across the globe met online, copied the code of an existing coin, and branded it with the already popular Doge internet meme – a picture of a Shiba Inu dog surrounded by fragments of broken English: “wow much coin.”

Although their main goal was to make the coin pointless and undesirable, it became one of the most popular and enduring cryptocurrencies on the market.

Following dogecoin’s previous surge in 2021, I studied how its fervent network of influencers and everyday investors worked together to draw tremendous attention – and capital – to the joke currency.

Elon Musk’s 2021 appearance on ‘Saturday Night Live’ caused the price of dogecoin to tumble.

To understand the appeal of these absurd investments, you have to look at the time and energy that users invest into these networks and the rewards, both financial and social, they get in return.

Meme coins are collaborative enterprises. Members of these online communities have an economic incentive to become outspoken boosters: The more the value of dogecoin rises, the more their investments grow. But they also receive social validation from other meme coin investors when they pump up the coin.

In other words, behind every meme coin is a collective of strangers on a communal mission to make more money.

Dogecoin and its imitators have been described by their leadership as crypto movements, shared journeys and community-owned projects. Beyond branding the assets with culturally resonant images, whether it’s a Shiba Inu dog or Pepe the Frog, successful crypto ventures are characterized by complex webs of trust. Trust in the technology. Trust in its potential for future appreciation. And trust that those holding power in the networks won’t exploit the rest.

This loyalty is woven among a global network of users who collaborate around the clock to promote their coin and demonstrate their unwavering commitment to its success.

In times of price appreciation, the collective buzzes with elation.

During price dips, community members mutually reinforce their comrades’ – and their own – beliefs that this is just a bump in the road and that their collective efforts will eventually lead to a handsome payoff. Even in the coldest of crypto winters, this ritualistic behavior helps these speculative communities endure. Community serves as a substitute for financial loss.

The investment strategies in these communities – and the conviction in their payoff – involve repeating and reposting what others have said, like any traditional internet meme.

Trolling traditional valuation

The real value of meme coins cannot be understood in the same way as traditional assets, such as stocks and physical commodities. These types of assets have fundamentals, such as a company’s financial statements, or public demand for basic goods, from coffee to oil.

Conversely, the fundamentals of meme coins are reflected in their network activity, such as daily active users, and less concrete metrics, such as social sentiment and mindshare – how much public awareness a coin has generated compared with its rivals.

Of course, the valuations of traditional assets are also affected by these social factors. The difference is that meme coins offer little by way of productive activity. They add nothing to the economy. Occasionally, their leadership will build financial services around them, but these are generally added as afterthoughts, especially as a way to drum up more speculative excitement.

Meme coins troll the traditional conventions of valuation and mock the edicts and dogmas of mainstream investors.

And that’s exactly the point.

Participation in meme coin communities – or any crypto community, for that matter – entails embracing an alternative economic experience. They are speculative sandboxes for playing outside of the conventional rules of investment.

Who let the Doge out?

Musk is the quintessential meme coin influencer.

As the richest man in the world, he’s viewed by many as a paragon of savvy investing. His massive following extends far beyond dogecoin’s social network. And his promotional efforts are playful – so playful that the judge in his class-action case dismissed his dogecoin tweets as mere “puffery” and that “no reasonable investor could rely upon them.”

Dogecoin previously reached the peak of its memetic momentum when Musk appeared on “Saturday Night Live.” Now, instead of sitting at the Weekend Update news desk cracking jokes, he’s sitting in Trump’s office advising the president-elect. In other words, dogecoin’s memetic resonance has ascended from pop culture to politics, helping it capture a bigger slice of the public’s mindshare.

While dogecoin has specifically benefited from Musk’s proximity to Trump, the broader crypto market is leaping with optimism for a crypto-friendly administration. Speaking at the Bitcoin 2024 conference in July, the GOP candidate ensured he’d make the United States “the crypto capital of the planet.” After pouring $131 million into this election cycle, the crypto industry can now claim 274 pro-crypto members of the U.S. House of Representatives and 20 pro-crypto U.S. senators.

Between Musk buddying up with Trump and a shifting regulatory environment, the dog can once again run free.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.