Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswami, two tech billionaires with anti-government axes, aim to cut $500 billion from the federal budget. They visited the Capitol on Thursday to explain their intentions to Republican lawmakers. But how exactly does the “Ministry of Government Efficiency” work?
First of all, it’s not really some branch of government.
“Only Congress can create departments,” said David C. Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University and an expert on administrative procedures. The body proposed by Mr. Musk and Mr. Ramaswamy would instead be a government advisory committee, with only the power to make recommendations to Congress about government waste and inefficiency. “Ironically, the government is already in that position as part of the Office of Management and Budget,” Vladeck said.
At first glance, the “Doge” efforts appear to be redundant efforts. Musk met with Republican leaders including Mike Johnson and John Thune to discuss recommendations by the Comptroller General, an independent body led by the inspector general, that could cut the federal budget by up to $200 billion a year if implemented. He emphasized that there is a gender.
Eugene Dodaro has served as Auditor General since 2008 through both Republican and Democratic administrations. The position requires a presidential appointment and is subject to Senate confirmation. Neither Musk nor Ramaswamy would be subject to legislative questioning in their confirmation hearings if Doge is an outside government advisory board, which may be one reason why it was proposed as such.
Nevertheless, Prime Minister Boris Johnson called the initiative a “historic moment” and praised the pair as “innovators” ready to streamline government operations.
Although the Governor’s Advisory Council would no longer be a government agency, it would still be subject to federal law. The Federal Advisory Committee Act governs how they operate. Vladek said the first step would require Musk and Ramaswamy to submit a charter to the president.
“The Advisory Committee Act provides that most of the deliberations of the advisory committee must be made public,” Vladeck said. “As much as Elon Musk wants to do all this in secret, it’s not really possible to do it as an advisory board.”
Mr. Musk and Mr. Ramaswamy, if not the president, have yet to present the commission’s charter to the public.
One of the key elements of the Advisory Committee Act is that the Committee Rules state that “the advice and recommendations of an advisory committee shall not be improperly influenced by the appointing authority or any special interest; ‘independent judgment’.
Mr. Musk owns or runs a number of companies that have large government contracts and rely on a favorable regulatory environment for profitability, but special interests are at stake. That alone would not be enough to prevent Musk from becoming chairman, but he may have to step down if budget issues related to NASA related to Musk’s SpaceX company come to light. said Vladek.
“It’s not going to be a two-person committee,” he said. “It’s going to be a committee of 20 or 30 people. Again, all he’s doing is making recommendations, and if there’s a fiscal responsibility, it’s Congress. It will be a judgment.”
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer is reportedly creating a parallel Doge subcommittee to act on recommendations made by the efficiency effort. Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene is expected to chair the subcommittee.
Democratic Rep. Jared Moskowitz’s participation in the Dodge caucus to emphasize that increased efficiency doesn’t have to mean cutting services further boosts Dodge’s bipartisan potential.
“I intend to join the Congressional Dodger Caucus because I believe that streamlining government processes and reducing inefficient government spending should not be a partisan issue. I am convinced that there is a way to do this and make it work better for the American people,” Moskowitz said.
Musk and Ramaswamy laid out their vision for efficiency efforts in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last month. Their initial stated targets are political outgroups that receive federal funding, such as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, international organizations that receive U.S. grants, and Planned Parenthood.
But they are also considering deep cuts to the federal workforce. The two have already called on the agency to return federal employees to offices and end generous work-from-home programs.
Sen. Joni Ernst echoed similar sentiments in a 60-page report released Thursday.
“Taxpayers are being charged more than $182,000 per year per employee to cover the operating and maintenance costs of the Department of Labor headquarters,” the report states. “On average, fewer than 500 employees work in the building, which costs nearly $60 million a year in rent, operating and maintenance costs.”
Ernst’s argument is that there is no concrete link between allowing federal employees to work from home on a regular basis and increasing productivity. Meanwhile, the federal government spends billions of dollars maintaining office space for people who have never been in the office.
So either fill your office with employees or lay people off, she said.
A consequence of this strategy is that many federal employees (whose jobs are well protected) may quit if ordered back to work, leading to a wave of lawsuits and federal government The possibility of compensation for mass layoffs can be avoided. .
However, these areas only make up a small portion of the overall budget. Most federal spending is mandatory spending: Congress passed basic infrastructure legislation to reduce spending on Social Security (24% of the budget), Medicare (14%), and veterans benefits (3.5%). Things need to change, but President Trump has vowed not to cut back on all of these touches.
Even discretionary spending is politically sensitive. The approximately $1.6 trillion in discretionary spending for fiscal year 2024 will be split between $842 billion for defense programs and $758 billion for non-defense activities such as federal law enforcement and air traffic control.
US support for Ukraine in its war with Russia and the reorganization of the Navy and Marine Corps to face a potential conflict with China put defense reductions at great risk. But fiscal watchdogs like Sen. Elizabeth Warren may be willing to advocate common cause with Republicans when it comes to cutting inefficiencies in Pentagon spending.
Brandon Arnold of the National Tax Union said refusing to address “sacred cows” such as national defense would limit meaningful progress. For example, Department of Defense audits have revealed waste in weapons systems and procurement processes. But past efforts to cut spending led by Republicans have often failed to produce results.
As Mr. Musk said, “We need to spend the people’s money wisely.” Mr. Musk has set the sunset date for the president’s recommendations as July 4, 2026.
