The federal government needs reform in many areas. Duplication and overlap abound. Many programs and activities are at high risk for fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. The federal government faces a looming fiscal crisis as spending spins out of control. Annual interest payments on the federal debt exceed the entire defense budget. Entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare are financially unsustainable and on the road to insolvency. It’s no wonder most Americans lack confidence in the federal government.
In the face of this, President-elect Trump announced to great fanfare a reform initiative called the “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE), to be led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. Despite its name, DOGE will be a non-government entity although it will work closely with the executive branch and Congress.[1]Several past government reform initiatives used a similar model. The closest analog is the Grace Commission, established by President Reagan in the early 1980s. DOGE is to complete its work by July 4, 2026.
Will DOGE be a serious, substantive undertaking?
At best, DOGE could be the kind of high-profile, high-powered change agent needed to train the spotlight on the government’s many shortcomings and deliver major improvements and taxpayer savings. At worst, it might be nothing more than a political exercise and a vanity project for its co-leaders that accomplishes little and distracts from more earnest reform efforts.
Time will tell which way DOGE goes, but there are early warning signs. The rhetoric coming from Trump, Musk, and Ramaswamy—e.g., “drain the swamp,”“second Manhattan Project,” use a “chainsaw not a chisel”–makes DOGE sound more like a scattershot attack on the federal government than a thoughtful undertaking to fix it.[2]See, e.g., here and here. Its pervasive emphasis on “cutting the government down to size” ignores what should be a concomitant—in fact, more important—goal for any comprehensive reform initiative: enhancing the performance and effectiveness of core federal government functions.
Musk and Ramaswamy make extravagant promises that call into question their understanding of the work before them. In particular, Musk’s suggestion that DOGE could cut “at least $2 trillion” from the annual federal budget has been met with great skepticism. [3]See here for a detailed reality check of the early DOGE agenda.
The selection of Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of the most frivolous and least respected members of the House of Representatives, to chair a subcommittee working with DOGE is another red flag.
A reform effort as ambitious as DOGE claims to be is sure to encounter resistance from many corners. It will need all the credibility, good will, and support it can muster from the public, the media, and politicians of both parties. If its leaders are genuinely interested in achieving serious results, they would be wise to project more seriousness.
DOGE prioritizes dubious projects
Some of the specific priorities Musk and Ramaswamy pushed in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed raise additional warning signs. For example, they suggest that a “plethora” of current federal regulations are illegal and pledge to develop a list of “tens of thousands” of them for Trump to “nullify.” They would also eliminate federal employees in numbers “at least proportionate to the number of regulations nullified.”
It’s absurd to think that thousands of legally suspect regulations have gone unchallenged and are just waiting for DOGE to discover them. In any event, Trump can’t simply nullify regulations. Repealing them is a complex, legally fraught process requiring the experience and expertise of the employees they plan to eliminate. One recent Supreme Court decision Musk and Ramaswamy cite as easing this task will actually make it harder.
Another problematic example is their pledge to target $500 billion in annual federal spending that is “unauthorized by Congress.” Apparently, they refer to agencies and programs operating under expired statutory authorizations. Contrary to their implication, there’s nothing illegal about this. Lack of authorizing legislation is significant only under internal congressional rules, which Congress regularly overrides as it continues to fund these agencies and programs.
There are much better projects for DOGE to prioritize
DOGE could get off to a stronger start by prioritizing less dubious and divisive projects that are more likely to attract broad public and political support and achieve real results. Nonpartisan federal watchdogs such as the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and agency inspectors general (IGs) have identified and reported (repeatedly) on a host of major problems facing the federal government along with their root causes. Much of what’s needed to address them is already known.
One major reason these problems persist is that executive branch and congressional decision-makers lack the interest and sustained commitment to implement solutions. A high-visibility initiative like DOGE could serve as the catalyst needed to pressure decision-makers to act. It could use the extensive body of work already done by GAO and the IGs as a roadmap for this purpose. Some examples:
-
- Hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars are lost annually to fraud and other improper payments. DOGE could start by targeting six federal programs GAO identified as accounting for $200 billion of the estimated $236 billion of improper payments in fiscal year 2023.
- The Defense Department is a poster child for inefficiency and mismanagement. It can’t pass a basic audit. It owns five areas on GAO’s high risk list that have persisted for decades and contributes to several more. Its ossified business operations, which seem impervious to reform, present many targets well suited to DOGE’s aggressive entrepreneurial approach.
- GAO reports that the nation’s air traffic control system “urgently” needs modernization. Many of its data systems are seriously outdated and unsustainable. Fixing these problems would enhance the safety and efficiency of air travel.
- Federal oversight of the U.S. food supply is badly fragmented. Fifteen different agencies administer at least 30 different laws in this area. For example, cheese and meat pizzas are regulated by different departments. This problem has languished on GAO’s high risk list for 17 years. Streamlining and rationalizing this regulatory maze would save money and enhance food quality and safety.
There are many other well-documented, promising reform opportunities like these that offer substantial taxpayer savings and improvements in the delivery of essential government services that the public relies on.
Entitlement program reforms should be on the table
Any comprehensive reform initiative, especially one that promises to improve the government’s dire fiscal situation, should include massive entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare. Both programs are fiscally unsustainable as now structured and will become insolvent in about a decade. While these programs are popular, the reform options—some mix of reduced benefits, tightened eligibility requirements, and/or higher taxes—are not. Consequently, neither political party shows interest in taking them on despite the inevitable need to face up to them at some point. Unfortunately, DOGE apparently plans to dodge them as well.
Congress is a major obstacle to reform
Bureaucrats are convenient scapegoats for the government’s woes. In reality, however, Congress is both a primary source of many problems and often a roadblock to fixing them. Federal agencies and their employees exercise only the powers that Congress grants them. The thousands of federal programs now on the books are the work of Congress. A significant cause of massive federal regulations is Congress delegating vast discretionary authority to agencies with little accompanying guidance. As Congress has become increasingly dysfunctional in recent years, it has defaulted more and more of its legislative responsibilities to the executive branch.
DOGE will probably find Congress to be more of an adversary than an ally. Most members of Congress see little political payoff to pursuing government reforms. On the contrary, troubled programs and activities often have constituencies with political influence on Capitol Hill that actively resist reforms. Lawmakers on authorizing and appropriating committees zealously guard their turf and protect the special interests that fund their elections. These headwinds to reform contribute mightily to the tenacity of problems like fragmented food inspection programs and hidebound Defense Department operations.
Congressional barriers to reform are a rare example of bipartisanship; members of both parties are equally protective of their constituencies and resistant to change. If DOGE is to achieve real reform, its leaders must find ways to overcome these forces.
Outlook
Comprehensive federal government reform is sorely needed. DOGE starts with the key potential advantages of a high profile, aggressive leaders (to say the least), and strong presidential support. Whether it can live up to its billing remains to be seen. As a good first step, its leaders should approach their work with more realistic, strategic thinking and less hubris.