02 Dec Dept. of Govt. Eff.
Despite the irony of two guys running one such thing, I like the idea behind Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy’s new “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE).
The underlying premise is that our federal government (1) is too expensive, (2) wastes money, (3) has been expanded beyond its constitutional purview, and (4) interferes too much with individual freedoms and free enterprise.
President-elect Donald Trump says “go to it, Elon and Vivek.” I agree. DOGE results will make a perfect gift to deliver for our nation’s 250th birthday celebration on July 4, 2026.
Whys
I know, I know, the words Department of Government Efficiency form an oxymoron, like jumbo shrimp and deafening silence. That is the point.
There indeed is very little that is efficient about our federal government right now. First is its sheer size: 2.3 million civilian employees, with a median salary of around $100,000. The total payroll is more than $200 billion. One objective of DOGE is to shrink the budgetary impact of such a large workforce.
All told, Elon Musk has called for $2 trillion of cuts in federal spending, although it is unclear whether he envisions that as an annual figure or over a period of years. If annual, that would be a third of all federal outlays.
Even more inefficient than the size and cost of the government alone is its cumbersomeness. There is much duplication of effort, delay of action, and disincentive for creativity. The balkiness of the federal agency structure cries out for reform.
Then there are the many impositions the federal government puts on its citizens and businesses. In the last five decades, some 217,000 new federal regulations have been enacted. Many of these, while well intended, interfere with Americans’ ability to make their own decisions, take responsibility for their own lives, and enjoy the fruits of freedom and the free enterprise system. As Ronald Reagan famously noted, the phrase “I’m from the government and I’m here to help” has become another oxymoron.
Based on these factors, President-elect Trump and his DOGE appointees believe they have a mandate from the majority of Americans to “slash and burn the bureaucracy.” I wouldn’t say it so colorfully, but, based on my principles of limited government, freedom, and free enterprise, I agree with the concept.
Ways
How could it be done? How do you unwind and untangle a moon-sized ball of string? Yes, how does an unofficial “department” run by two volunteers make the U.S. Government efficient?
It seems important to point out that even the Musk axe cannot cut $2 trillion dollars out of one year’s federal budget without reducing Social Security and Medicare benefits and drastically lowering military expenditures. We cannot not pay the trillion dollars in annual interest owed to bondholders, and there simply is not $2 trillion of discretionary spending available to cut. Remember that the entire federal payroll is “only” in the $200 billion range, and one trillion is a thousand billion. Even elimination of $500 billion of annual expenditure on things unauthorized by Congress – many of which seem politically impossible to cut – only gets a fourth of the way there.
What can be done, though, is to start by eliminating federal regulations. Donald Trump has stated his intention to repeal ten regulations for every new one put in place. While this alone will not save trillions, it will help the private economy to thrive. GDP growth will in turn enable private employers to absorb laid-off federal employees, as discussed below.
In a Wall Street Journal piece published on November 21, 2024, Musk and Ramaswamy revealed that they will work with people imbedded in each agency to identify reductions in the workforce. Basically, they will ascertain the minimum headcount necessary to perform all constitutionally permissible and statutorily mandated functions. And they will recommend the rest be eliminated.
The DOGE boys recognize that many federal workers are protected from termination. So, their recommendations include private-sector ideas like early retirement incentives and severance. If that doesn’t accomplish enough, they and Mr. Trump plan to make senior civil servants terminable at will, and also to relocate some agencies – hoping that employees will quit rather than move. In addition, Musk and Ramaswamy recommend requiring all federal employees to come into the office five days a week, which they believe would result in “a wave of voluntary terminations that we welcome.”
The big “trump card” in any effort to reduce the size, cost, and interference of government is to eliminate departments altogether. Congress would need to approve this, but Republicans will control both the House and Senate. One federal department that often draws political criticism is the U.S. Department of Education, which is the smallest of all departments, with “only” 4,435 employees. Others that I have seen called out for potential elimination include Agriculture, Energy, Commerce, Labor, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Interior. The idea is that any essential functions of those departments could be moved to other agencies, to states, or to the private sector.
The same is true for agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Small Business Administration, and Environmental Protection Agency. Some suggest even that the role of the Veterans Administration and its 400,000 employees be moved to private hospitals and clinics.
The Department of Government Efficiency will have a plethora of options for reducing federal spending and regulations. My hope is that effectiveness is increased as a byproduct.
Written by Quentin R. Wittrock, founder of Principle Based Politics.
Look for his posts each week, as this blog will explore and promote the idea of principle in politics, both as to individual elected leaders and our federal government as an institution.
Principle Based Politics does not endorse or support any particular political candidate or party.
Mona Glesne
Posted at 14:49h, 03 DecemberThanks for spelling out the possible ways these reductions can be attained. God help them!
William C. Zucco
Posted at 15:44h, 03 DecemberI have read all of your posts to date. They have been reasonably written even from my liberal lens. This one today misses the mark. There is no way that any reduction to the government won’t be mean spirited and self serving. Both gentlemen were involved in spreading lies during the election. While I agree that the government needs trimming, these two will eliminate needed things to protect the tax cuts to the rich. Where are the guard rails to what is cut?
Quentin
Posted at 15:50h, 03 DecemberIt means so much to me that you follow my blog, Bill! I realize that “the devil is in the details,” but I do approve of the concept of significantly reducing the size and scope of the federal government. Let’s hope they do it right.
Russell Weaver
Posted at 16:31h, 03 DecemberQuentin, your closing argument rings hollow, when you said, “Let’s hope they do it right”. We’ll see what will happen when Trump’s economic plan based on the model of running the government like a business is put into play. As a former teacher, I remember the efforts to run our education system on the business model and the disruption is caused in our schools.
It is going to to be a blood letting, where our economy is going to tank when all of those jobs are eliminated. I also didn’t read in your article any talk of the effect on our national debt when Trump’s promise to cut taxes — especially revenue from his billionaire friends.
Becki Drahota
Posted at 19:44h, 03 DecemberNo solution is perfect, but this DOGE approach is innovative, has a clock on its existence, and is worth a try.
DKnight
Posted at 19:56h, 03 DecemberVery well written and researched post. I agree. Limited government equals more individual freedom. It is the right thing to do. Even socialist Sen, Bernie Sanders has made recent comments that indicate some agreement on making government more efficient. The government happy types, many of which work for or in government, never want to cut or reduce anything–they must be ignored. It is not mean spirited–it is actually quite compassionate to give us all more liberty from overbearing government. The march towards socialism will hopefully be slowed by Trump, Musk and Vivek. Let me veer off point for a moment and note that, while we can all understand a father pardoning his son, Biden’s recent statements, actions and endless lies, should remind us all that he never should have been elected to any office–ever.
Michael Hoffman
Posted at 01:35h, 04 DecemberQuestion: What is it called when Musk and Ramaswamy cut the Federal government workforce (perhaps by half)? Answer: A good start! The phrase, “Good riddance to bad rubbish” is another appropriate description. Washington loves passing thousands of new regulations each year that harm business.
The level of hate-filled bigotry, in particular against people of Catholic faith, by Democrats (who comprise the vast majority of the Washington, DC work force) is at an all-time high. Even worse is the hate-filled bigotry of Washington, DC against the most vulnerable of all human life . . . . an innocent child in the mother’s womb.
Donald Trump won the 2024 electoral vote by a landslide. He, also, won the popular vote (despite Kamala Harris blowing $1.5 billion in her hate-filled campaign). In contrast, Washington, DC voted 92% for Harris and only 5% for Trump. Imagine 92%! That ratio illustrates how out-of-touch Washington, DC workers are with the rest of the country.
To summarize, cutting of the Federal workforce in DC will be a case of “good riddance to bad rubbish!”