Doxxing

The pressure on Musk's team picks up.

The People Carrying Out Musk’s Plans at DOGE

The New York Times profiles people at DOGE. Lots of people.

When did they ever do this for any other agency?

‘The New York Times identified 50 people within the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, a group formed by Elon Musk that in a short few weeks has radically upended federal agencies. Few members have formal Washington experience. Many are software engineers. All seem to have a clear mandate: Shrink and disrupt the federal government.’

A five-point test for bureaucracy — and democracy

At this point, we have to assume that the Administration anticipated this level of resistance and they are prepared to endure it politically. They knew what happened in Argentina.

‘The need for administrative reform is undeniable. The problem, however, lies in the unilateral and coercive nature of the approach. The Trump administration appears fixated on numbers — reducing head count and fiscal deficits— while neglecting the necessary processes of consultation and persuasion. Unsurprisingly, the fallout has been swift and severe. For example, as the Internal Revenue Service moves to lay off 6,000 employees, complaints are surging from taxpayers struggling with delays in filing and processing returns. Meanwhile, former federal employees abruptly cast out into the streets have fueled anti-Trump protests, where chants of “impeach the president” are growing louder.’

Inside DOGE’s Clash With the Federal Workforce

I’m old enough to remember the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. I am an alum (though I had left before the filing). I have friends and family who worked at the firm. I bled green, as they say.

I remember low morale in the financial markets. We used to have a phrase for it, “hiding under the desk.”

I remember the demonization of people who work in financial services.

I remember the hysterical overreactions from the regulators.

Cry me a bloody river.

‘“They’ve shaken government workers to their core,” said Michigan Rep. Debbie Dingell, a Democrat. “Morale is low. People are paranoid and they’re scared. I’m tired of the demonization of public employees. They’re pitting people against each other.”‘

Trump Administration Escalates Layoffs of Federal Workers

Key here is that the Administration wants to make it difficult to challenge the layoffs by adhering to the statutory mandates.

‘Russell T. Vought, the head of the White House budget office, and Charles Ezell, the acting head of the Office of Personnel Management, circulated a memo to government leaders calling for agencies to prepare plans for additional “large-scale reductions” in the federal work force in March and April.

‘Denigrating the federal bureaucracy as “bloated” and “corrupt,” the seven-page memo called for agencies to be drastically cut — in some instances to the fullest extent allowed by the law. One line in the memo said agencies “should focus on the maximum elimination of functions that are not statutorily mandated.”’

GSA eliminates 18F

Maybe 18F just wasn’t that good compared to what Musk and Co. would expect from tech workers in the private sector.

‘Other examples of the team’s work include the redesign of a website at the Justice Department on a key disability civil rights law, ada.gov. Last year, the office celebrated its tenth year, highlighting 450 government tech projects it had worked on since its inception under former President Barack Obama. The team’s size has fluctuated over the years, beginning with several dozen staffers and at times growing to well over 100 technologists in its ranks. About 90 people were impacted, two of the affected employees told Nextgov/FCW.’

Trump administration asks agencies to cull consultants

I’d love to see the defense of using high-priced outside consultants.

‘The acting head of the General Services Administration, Stephen Ehikian, asked “agency senior procurement executive[s]” to review their consulting contracts with the 10 companies the administration deemed the highest paid using procurement data — Deloitte, Accenture Federal Services, Booz Allen Hamilton, General Dynamics, Leidos, Guidehouse, Hill Mission Technologies Corp., Science Applications International Corporation, CGI Federal and International Business Machines Corporation — in a memo dated Feb. 26 obtained by Nextgov/FCW.

‘Those 10 companies “are set to receive over $65 billion in fees in 2025 and future years,” Ehikian wrote.’

This Company Gets 98% of Its Money From the U.S. Government. DOGE Is Coming for Firms Like It.

Ex post justification of consulting contracts is going to be fascinating.

‘The GSA memo also asks that agencies justify consulting contracts by explaining why they are “mission critical” and provide substantive technical support. The exact impact of the review remains to be seen, said Stan Soloway, CEO of the consulting firm Celero Strategies, and the former head of the largest trade association of government-service contractors.’

Despised bank regulation agency just won’t die — despite Trump’s best efforts

It is remarkably difficult to kill a government agency.

‘Trump’s DOJ in a filing seconded Vought’s plans, stating, “the predicate to running a more streamlined and efficient bureau is that there will continue to be a CFPB.”

‘Amid the back-and-forth, firebrand conservative Congressman Byron Donalds of Florida has had enough. He introduced a bill Wednesday that would kill the CFPB once and for all. Donalds is usually in sync with The Donald, so I asked why is Trump moving one way on the future of this thing, and Donalds another.’

Congress Can Easily Green-Light DOGE

This is a very creative time in DC if this is kind of action being bandied. Let’s see if they have the stones for it.

‘The firestorm over President Trump’s alleged executive overreach—and most of the court cases challenging it—could be largely extinguished if a single sentence were added to the soon-to-be-passed reconciliation bill: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for fiscal years 2025-26 the president is hereby authorized and directed to identify and eliminate at least $500 billion of waste, fraud and abuse in federal spending by auditing expenditures, discharging employees or officers, canceling grants and reducing or eliminating agencies and departments.”’

The Trump Administration’s Attack on Science Will Backfire

In a way, the cutbacks on science funding are a tax on the private sector. This will require them to spend more of their own money to keep doing what they do.

One interesting consequence of this might be a revival of large-scale companies engaging in more pure research. Maybe.

‘Third, if government science funding subsidizes anyone, it’s American firms. Universities are the training grounds for engineers and scientists, most of whom go on to work for U.S. companies. Undermining science funding weakens this pipeline, ultimately harming American firms rather than striking a blow at wokeness. One of the biggest failings of the Biden administration were its attacks on America’s high-tech entrepreneurial firms. Why go after Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Meta when these are among our best, world-beating firms? But you know what other American sector is world-beating? American universities. The linkage is no accident.’

Signs Of A Renewed Regulatory Reform Push From DOGE

With all the talk of cost cuts, let’s not forget the deregulatory mission.

‘Going forward, DOGE should consider setting clear, quantifiable benchmarks so that success can be easily defined and measured. This could include a goal like eliminating 50,000 pages from the Code of Federal Regulations. At times, Elon Musk has floated a goal to cut $2 trillion in government spending. Some question whether that is achievable, but pivoting this aspiration toward a $2 trillion regulatory cost-saving target might be well within reach. Consider that rolling back just one large-scale rule—Biden’s stringent tailpipe emissions standards for vehicles—could, by government estimates, save $870 billion.’

One Elite, Two Elites, Red Elite, Blue Elite

Who is in the elite anyway?

‘The question is not whether liberal elites exist or even why they are resented. It is why they are so much more resented than the other elites—why, for that matter, the right-wing billionaires and millionaires who have exerted so much control over the federal government for decades and who exercise nearly unimpeded rule over the vast majority of this country’s territory nonetheless get to be the “other” elites, or the “counter-elite,” as the more self-conscious of their number have begun to fashion themselves. Why don’t we see them?’