Trump’s DOGE: The dog that won’t hunt

With the president-elect finalizing his cabinet, there has been criticism over a not-so-official government agency: The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The president-elect has supported this newly formed advisory board in dismantling government bureaucracy, slashing excess regulations, cutting wasteful expenditures, and restructuring federal agencies. Still, the ambitious goals of department heads Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are raising doubts on both sides of the political aisle. 

During a MAGA campaign trail in New York, Musk outlined an ambitious goal of a $2 trillion reduction or 30% in the annual budget through DOGE. The most recent report of annual fiscal spending totaled $6.75 trillion according to the US Treasury. With such an immense budget reduction proposal, the ambitions are unrealistic. 

The majority of the federal budget is made up of mandatory-spending entitlement programs, which include Social Security, Medicare, and other health-care programs: necessities that millions of Americans have continuously relied on. One of these entitlement programs includes Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Originally signed into law in 2010, the program has reduced, per the Census Bureau, approximately 20% of Americans uninsured to only 8%.

The program has continuously faced scrutiny from Republicans, and Trump has historically proposed reducing subsidies and eligibility for this program. With control over Congress and the executive branch, Republicans will likely prevent the renewal of the Biden Administration’s ACA subsidies in 2025, which will double premiums on payments for ACA in most states. 

DOGE and a Republican-controlled house would not likely cut entitlement programs that millions of Americans depend on because such programs are considered the untouchable “third-rail of American politics.” Nevertheless, Musk already has warned of “some temporary hardships” in the agency’s plans to reduce spending. 

Other categories include interest payments and defense spending, which would likely not be reduced due to the lack of unanimous Republican support. This would lead to roughly 12% of the federal budget for DOGE, and approximately 4% funds the Department of Education according to USAspending. The Department of Education is likely to be utilized in budget reduction rather than entitlement programs as Trump has pledged to reduce the department on numerous occasions. Similar to ACA though, the Trump administration will not likely cut all spending for this department. He has promised to move education “back to the states” and has threatened to cut spending for schools that teach “woke ideology,” and thus, Trump would likely than reorientate the Department of Education to fit his policy rather than force a complete shutdown. 

Which is why DOGE will likely not reach the 30% reduction in annual spending. Unless the Trump Administration takes drastic measures to cut entitlement programs that are essential in millions of Americans’ livelihoods, the entrepreneur’s zealous remarks will be short-lived. 

Even with ambiguity as to which programs and departments would be reduced, it is clear why the president-elect chose Musk for this role. The entrepreneur’s historical success in the private sphere validates why he is the most qualified. Tesla’s CEO has a track record for making drastic layoff decisions and budgeting. It was only two years ago when he decided to cut roughly 80% of X’s (formerly Twitter) staff. 

Similarly, through his aerospace company SpaceX, Musk has revolutionized the rocket business with his reusable Falcon 9 rockets. Fortunately for the entrepreneur, many of these risky decisions have led to financial profit such as reduced rocket payloads from tens of thousands of dollars per kilogram to only thousands. 

The question that many critics have for Musk is whether such drastic cuts in the private sector can be translated into the public sphere. Ramaswamy and Musk will not have the same authority as advisors for DOGE, and the avid goals to cut trillions in government spending are unlikely. 

Historically, the notion of a budget reduction advisory board run by businessmen is nothing new in American politics. The Reagan Administration’s Grace Commission had similar motives through productivity surveys on various federal governments. Ultimately, the commission successfully recommended cost-reduction plans to save billions; however, a majority of these plans were not carried out due to bureaucratic resistance. Moreover, the fact that dozens of private-sector businessmen ran the Grace Commission led to scrutiny over possible conflicts of interest in policy decisions.

Likewise, thanks to their capitalistic endeavors, Ramaswamy’s net worth is in the hundreds of millions and Musk’s net worth is in the hundreds of billions. Musk already has profited tens of billions in equity following the Trump victory according to CNBC. 

As an advisor to Trump, Musk may attempt to go after the Securities and Exchange Committee and Federal Aviation Administration—two federal agencies that have hindered Musk’s entrepreneurial endeavors. Musk could also leverage the Trump administration to grant billion-dollar contracts for SpaceX. Therefore, any endeavor with an economic incentive by Musk or Ramaswamy will likely face criticism. However, both men are still in the private sector and are not considered government workers; therefore, most backlash will likely be tenuous. 

DOGE remains an abruptly created advisory board that possesses a lot of ambiguity. Trump has stated that the advisory board will conclude its work “no later than July 4, 2026”. For the time being, Musk and Ramaswamy will have to find the balance between fantasy and reality as they digest the implications of cutting trillions from the federal budget. Cost-cutting advisory boards in the past have not been effective in previous administrations, and the two entrepreneurs will likely be faced with a bureaucratic wall that is more foreign in the private sector.