Gordon L. Weil
There’s a new government department. Except that it’s not part of the government
and it’s not a department.
It’s the Department of Government Efficiency, known at DOGE.
Sounds like something you’d make up,
maybe as a video game, but it is real. Its
leaders aren’t confirmed by the Senate, its staff is not taxpayer funded, it
communicates by social media, and it reports to a president who is not yet in
office.
It exists and is functioning. President-elect Trump expects it to respond to
the broad concern that the government is not working and is not responsive to
the public’s needs and priorities.
Trump has been acting presidential well before he takes
office. Of course, he has presidential experience,
but his early moves are likely to set a new precedent in governing. Creating a seemingly real government
department before he gets into the White House is part of his effort.
He gave the agency to Elon Musk, on paper the world’s
richest man, and Vivek Ramaswamy, who wants to be president one day. Both are wealthy enough to finance DOGE and
use Musk’s X social media to communicate.
The two men issue recommendations, which at times sound more
like their wish list than measures to improve federal government
operations. But DOGE should be taken
seriously, because it was created for them by President-elect Trump, and he
takes it seriously.
DOGE has three purposes.
It would bring federal spending under greater control to reduce the
annual deficit, allowing taxes to be cut, not raised. It would eliminate unwanted, unnecessary or
overlapping agencies or functions, reducing the size of government. It would give the president increased ability
to control the government.
The early proposals by the two DOGE bosses are somewhat
scattershot, but responsive to the Trump Republican agenda. The Department of Education and the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau are at risk of outright elimination. Even the Defense Department bureaucracy may
be in for cuts.
In line with the Supreme Court’s doubt about the powers of independent
regulatory agencies, DOGE might want to pare down the staffs of such bodies,
including the IRS. Outlays for culture,
public health, and NASA could all be reduced.
But plans have not yet taken final form.
Ultimately, the DOGE spirit might extend to dealing with the
two largest areas of federal spending, Social Security and Medicare. Decisions about their future funding must
come soon. One solution would be to
reduce benefits, which may sit well with DOGE.
The success of this cost-cutting approach may depend on
Congress. The president cannot close
agencies or programs that exist under law.
Although Trump disagrees, the law now prevents a president from refusing
to spend money on congressionally mandated programs. He would need the consent of Congress to
enact at least some major DOGE proposals.
While that may sound easy with a GOP Congress, it’s not a
certainty. Many programs exist because members of Congress want to please
specific constituencies. Regardless of
their party, they may be reluctant to kill or cut them. Partisan support for the president may not
overcome catering to their backers.
Evidence exists that Trump and DOGE may inevitably face a
hard sell. The Government Accountability
Office, something like the national accountant, has already looked at much of
what DOGE is supposed to do, but the agency is mostly ignored.
The GAO has published a detailed list of hundreds of federal
programs that duplicate or overlap other programs. For example, 80 economic development programs
are run by four different agencies. They
exist thanks to proposals by members of Congress or turf battles among the
agencies. They probably waste billions
of dollars.
Even more worrisome is the GAO High Risk Series, which “identifies
government operations with vulnerabilities to fraud, waste, abuse, and
mismanagement, or in need of transformation.”
Sometimes agencies heed warnings and undertake enough reforms to get off
the list. There are now 34 GAO warnings.
but the president and Congress take little interest in them.
Presidents and department heads are selected for political
reasons, not their administrative abilities.
A function like DOGE could make sense if it were independent and not
overly ideological. Of course, GAO could
be used, if it were taken more seriously.
So-called zero-base budgeting for agencies could also be
used. Under it, they would regularly
develop the lowest budget needed to get their missions accomplished and request
any new funding for going beyond that.
Congress could eliminate or create programs. President Jimmy Carter installed a workable ZBB,
but it was gone by the presidency of George W. Bush.
Large organizations, public or private, will always be
inefficient. Though its agenda may turn
out to be overly personal, too partisan or controversial, Trump’s DOGE
recognizes that inefficiency may have gone too far, causing lost public
confidence in government.
