'People are really angry': Lawmakers facing voter blowback over Elon Musk's chaos
Source: Raw Story
February 8, 2025 7:59AM ET
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are feeling the wrath of constituents as their phone lines light up with complaints, worries and confusion over Elon Musk's efforts to gut government programs and fire longtime civil servants.
According to a report from the Washington Post, phone lines are jammed and there is no room in voicemail systems for voters to leave messages leading one lawmaker to admit, "It is a deluge on DOGE." Musk is causing no small amount of grief for House and Senate members with his announcements on X about which departments he will be targeting next as Donald Trump gives him free rein to create chaos.
"Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said the Senate’s phones were receiving 1,600 calls each minute, compared with the usual 40 calls per minute," the Post is reporting. "Many of the calls she’s been receiving are from people concerned about U.S. DOGE Service employees having broad access to government systems and sensitive information. The callers are asking whether their information is compromised and about why there isn’t more transparency about what is happening, she said." Murkowski is particularly vulnerable because her state employs a larger than-normal number of federal workers.
“Truly our office has gotten more phone calls on Elon Musk and what the heck he’s doing mucking around in federal government than I think anything we’ve gotten in years," Sen. Tina Smith (D-MN) complained. "People are really angry.” Sen. Angus King (I-ME) told reporters, "We can hardly answer the phones fast enough. It’s a combination of fear, confusion and heartbreak, because of the importance of some of these programs.”
Read more: https://www.rawstory.com/elon-musk-angry/?utm_source=superhead
= new reply since forum marked as read
And we know how much a "subpoena" is valued when one can be ignored and it takes a whole process to get a "Contempt of Congress" conviction. 
Imagine what Pam Bondi's DOJ would do with a "referral" for not answering a Congressional subpoena.
The ability of Congress to go to court is LIMITED. I posted about this another thread (excerpt from that ) - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3387404
the Supreme Court took a more narrow view of individual legislator standing in Raines v. Byrd.8 In that 1997 case, six Members of Congress challenged the Line Item Veto Act of 1996 (LIVA), a statute that authorized the President to cancel certain spending and tax benefit measures after signing them into law, as contrary to the bicameralism and presentment requirements of the Constitution.9 The Members argued that they had suffered injury because LIVA altered the effect of the votes they would cast in the future and divested them of their constitutional role in the repeal of legislation.10
The Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, found that the Members lacked standing to challenge LIVA because they had not suffered an injury different from that suffered by Congress as a whole.11 Citing separation of powers concerns about resolving a dispute implicating the constitutional authority of Congress and the Executive in a lawsuit brought by legislators, the Court, in refusing to proceed to the merits, noted that the Member-plaintiffs had not suffered the concrete deprivation of a private right, like the loss of their seats in Congress, but instead alleged a general diminution of their political power.12 The Court thus distinguished Raines from its earlier decision in Coleman on the grounds that the latter case had involved legislators who alleged that their votes had been nullified, whereas the LIVA challenged in Raines did not significantly impact the power of the Members’ votes because they could vote to exempt future appropriations bills from LIVA or repeal LIVA if necessary.13
(snip)
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S2-C1-5-7/ALDE_00013009/
They could attempt to sue based on the Coleman v. Miller case mentioned in the above (case dealt with state legislators suing) - "having their vote nullified" (in this particular case, because there has been NO legislation enacted to authorize all the crap going on). But it looks like having 3rd parties do the suing, makes it easier to show "harm" to those suing vs "harm" caused to Congress.
In that case - yes. The GOP Senators had the opportunity to convict and remove or convict and forbid from running for future office, but lacked the honor.
