DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) is no longer just an internet meme or an infamous cryptocurrency but a term that has been force-fed into the American vernacular since the election of Donald Trump in November.

In fact, though it is not an official government department, its activity as a government advisory body has become one of the most hotly debated topics in America. But the real question is whether DOGE is good or bad for America. This article argues that DOGE is doomed since it is largely based on an ideological purge of federal bureaucracy rather than a balanced and careful analysis of what is best for the American people. 

I do not disagree with the basic premise that governments should be transparent and accountable for the use of taxpayer funds. However, is that really the goal of DOGE, run by Elon Musk and his cadres?

Musk, the richest man on Earth, invested over $200 million in Trump’s presidential campaign, which undoubtedly helped him gain influence and power in the second Trump administration. Additionally, after Trump’s election Musk’s net worth skyrocketed “by 69 percent from $264 billion on November 6 [2024] to $447 billion on December 12 [2024].”

While this increase in net worth is largely due to the increase in the stock value of Tesla and SpaceX, Musk’s recent and expensive involvement in politics has raised alarms about conflicts of interest. There is investor concern that “Musk himself could have control over cutting down regulatory practices that affect his industries,” which is not an unreasonable one considering that Musk’s companies (Tesla and SpaceX) both have government contracts.

If you are a competitor of Musk, it is an unwelcome sight to see these developments. Even if one does not believe there is any corruption involved and that Musk has the best intentions, it creates an uncertain appearance and gives off the impression there is much more to the relationship between Musk and Trump than their words claim. This situation can hardly engender the trust of the American public, which is already deeply divided and pessimistic about the future of the country. 

However, there is another reason to be skeptical of DOGE: many of Musk’s allies are, too. This comes not from just Democrats but also Republicans, who, according to the Washington Post, report that Musk’s bold efforts to reform the federal government “have been rubbing some Trump advisers the wrong way.” Much of the internal discontent has yet to be made public, but there was a leak in the edifice when many Republicans rebuked last week’s email directive sent at Musk’s command to federal employees.

According to the Post, “Leaders at several agencies–including Trump’s own political appointees–have instructed employees not to respond to the email or to hold off on responding.” This apparent defiance is representative of a general unease that many in the Trump administration are beginning to feel with DOGE’s aggressive actions.

The Post stated: “Top treasury officials have complained about disruption. The secretary of state has pushed back on staff cuts. Inside the Education and Health and Human Services departments, political appointees have been informed–not consulted–about canceled grants and contracts, sometimes learning about decisions from the media…[and] Musk’s aggressive tactics to reshape the federal government have irritated and blindsided many senior officials in the Trump administration, including those tasked with running Cabinet departments being squeezed by his U.S. DOGE Service, according to interviews with more than 30 current and former officials and their advisers, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters.”

This situation is hardly surprising, as Trump’s broad and aggressive government overhaul is not achievable without disruption and chaos. However, if Trump and Musk’s allies are frustrated and concerned, why shouldn’t the rest of the American public? The Trump administration is being oddly secretive about the details of DOGE by “downplaying Musk’s authority while also declining to say–or at points admitting it doesn’t know–what civil servant is overseeing DOGE’s major decisions.”

Trump’s people claim Musk has no real power to make decisions but then authorizes Musk to demand people reply to his email directive or risk termination. Trump and Musk claim they are transparent, but the details reveal a much different story. So, what reasons do we have to believe theirs? There are too many unanswered questions looming over DOGE’s agenda and authority, especially with people’s careers and livelihoods hanging in the balance. 

In fact, USDA employees in Ames have already felt the harsh consequences of being in DOGE’s crosshairs. The Iowa State Daily reported that many USDA “sites across Iowa State and Ames were impacted by federal government layoffs in the last few days, including a former student employee of the year.” That student, Logan Conner, had the following to say in response to the layoff:

“There’s so much uncertainty with my future and my ability to continue to do research or public service, which is what I’m passionate about. That being impacted is just something that hurts.”

Should we as a nation be actively pushing people out of public service? Is working for a government agency an inherently wrong thing to do? Is it right to be fired by an agency run by an unelected White House advisor who allegedly has no power to make actual decisions? If you care about making the government stronger, gutting research and public service positions to make way for tax cuts for the wealthy is not a moral course of action, and while I applaud some of Trump’s ideas, like cutting the military budget in half, leaving people stranded without careers is not something that should be pursued.

Some may claim that these measures are necessary to save our government. The libertarian and conservative right certainly praise the downsizing of the federal government–but how is this compatible with the idea of the executive branch (which most Americans agree is already far too powerful) offering potentially unlawful power to an unelected advisor and doing so in ambiguity? How does the Trump administration also account for the reality that DOGE’s efforts are not enough to save the government’s massive debt problem? As Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen write, “Their [DOGE’s] proposed cuts are but drips of water in America’s overflowing bucket of debt–$36 trillion and counting.” 

For the fiscally responsible, 37% of “the contract terminations on an initial list on DOGE’s ‘Wall of Receipts’ (417 out of 1,125) weren’t expected to save any money, usually because it had already been spent,” according to Axios. Additionally, it is reported that a continuation of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts “would add at least $5 trillion to the 10-year deficit compared to the red ink if no changes are made to current federal law, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.”

It would seem then, instead of firing federal workers and leaving thousands of Americans unemployed, Trump should reconsider extending his tax cuts for the sake of the future of the American economy. Of course, this will not happen, as DOGE and Trump’s persecution of the federal government is largely ideological–a point many have been trying to drive home since his re-election. 

While all of us should care about seeking out government waste and abuse, there are too many ambiguities and contradictions with DOGE and the Trump administration’s role in downsizing the federal government. As Josh Bivens of the Economic Policy Institute writes, DOGE is “clearly a bad-faith effort rooted in ignorance and a knee-jerk desire to shrink the federal government, both for ideological reasons and the creation of space to preserve the tax cuts for the rich and corporations that will be locked-in later this year.”

Ideological ends are not sufficient to justify the layoffs of thousands of federal employees, who still have lives to maintain in an economy that Trump claims is in ruins because of the Biden administration. Americans should be weary of Trump and Musk’s message. It is dressed up in rhetoric and has hardly produced any tangible results. And though it is still very early  (too early to pass a final judgment) in the second Trump administration, Americans have every right to be skeptical of these measures.

Until Trump can demonstrate genuine achievement, DOGE will be nothing more than a stain on his legacy.