As Musk Steps Back, Experts Warn Doge Cuts Have Impacted Government Services | Elon Musk

Following Elon Musk’s exit from his role in overseeing the “Government Efficiency” initiative (DOGE), numerous governance analysts express concerns that Doge failed to enhance the quality of services provided by the government to American citizens.

“Across various efforts, we’ve observed significant attempts to influence public policy at the University of Michigan,” noted Donald Moynihan, public policy professor at the university. “Indeed, we have seen a decline in the quality of several government services.”

The world’s richest individual, Musk, was appointed by Donald Trump in January to lead the efficiency initiative but was restricted from serving as a “special government employee” for over 180 days due to his own business challenges.

While Musk claims that Doge has saved $150 billion during his tenure, many budget analysts have raised doubts about the validity of these figures. Musk has repeatedly been accused of exaggerations and false claims regarding savings, which represent just a fraction of the intended $1 trillion cuts.

Moynihan and other experts lament that Musk and Doge predominantly focus on the interests of business leaders aiming to maximize profits, rather than adopting a holistic strategy to enhance service efficiency.

Martha Guin Bell, executive director of Yale Budget Lab, emphasized Musk’s apparent disinterest in service improvement: “They referred to it as the ‘Governmental Slavery Ministry,’” said Gimbel. “There doesn’t seem to be a comprehensive plan to identify areas where government services can genuinely improve. Enhancing these services requires time, investment, and a commitment to building effective solutions.”

When inquired about whether Musk and Doge had improved government services, Zimbel burst into laughter. “Absolutely not,” she remarked. “There’s undeniably a decline in government services.”

Public policy analysts and citizens highlight numerous ways in which the Doge reductions have worsened government services, including longer appointment waits at veterans’ hospitals, extended holding times when calling the IRS, and increased wait times at Social Security offices. The departure of numerous experienced Social Security staff has resulted in much less assistance for welfare inquiries.

During a White House press conference on May 1, Musk defended Doge’s contributions: “I believe we have been effective overall. It may not be as effective as I had hoped, and we could achieve more,” Musk stated. “However, we’ve made advancements.”

Musk conceded that his $1 trillion goal proved to be more challenging than anticipated. “It’s truly about the discomfort the Cabinet and Congress are experiencing,” he remarked. “We can accomplish this, but we must address numerous complaints.”

The White House has not responded to inquiries regarding the decline in certain government services or how Doge has improved them.

Gimbel cautioned that many Americans may not realize the impending decline in government services as tens of thousands of ordered job eliminations unfold. “It’s certainly going to worsen,” she noted. For instance, the government is set to reduce 80,000 positions within the Veterans Affairs Department.

Numerous public policy experts believe Trump and Musk are greatly exaggerating claims of rampant waste, fraud, and abuse within the government, although Zimbel acknowledged that inefficiencies do exist. “There’s definitely room for improvement, and we can pursue it,” she stated. “Government officials are aware of where these inefficiencies lie. Much modernization of technology is needed. Yet, Doge seems uninterested in pursuing these concerns, as well as issues with Medicare and Medicaid over-expenditures.”

Max Stier, president of the Public Services Partnership, a nonprofit research organization, criticized the approach taken by Musk and Doge, likening it to actions of business executives like Jack Welch known for prioritizing cost-cutting over understanding organizational intricacies. Stier lamented that Musk and his team made abrupt cuts without adequate comprehension of the roles and responsibilities of those affected.

“Jack Welch would disapprove of the approach Doge has taken,” Stier remarked. “It’s not solely about saving costs; it disrupts organizational capabilities. Welch never let go of staff without understanding how the organization functions and the competencies of those laid off.”

Stier highlighted Musk’s assertion that Doge was meant to cut costs and enhance organization, stating, “It’s difficult to find a rational basis for the decisions being implemented. Americans certainly witness no improvements.”

“We are compromising the government’s capabilities,” he continued. “It’s evident that people are being let go aggressively, disrupting government services without any comprehension of the outcomes and results. It’s broken. It’s broken. This mindset is not prevalent in Silicon Valley.”

The claim of $150 billion in savings attributed to Musk appears to be a substantial overestimation, as it disregards significant costs associated with the Doge initiative, Stier argued. His group has indicated that due to layoffs, reemployment, retirement benefits, paid leave, and decreased productivity linked to over 100,000 workers, taxpayers are likely to incur $135 billion this year. Several public policy experts believe increased wait times and frustration should also count against the purported $150 billion in savings from Doge reductions.

Moynihan stated that Musk’s vision fundamentally misunderstands the role of government efficiency. “His perspective suggests that government officials are incapable of delivering value,” Moynihan commented. “Consequently, the notion of tools to enhance government services is completely foreign to Musk.”

“It appears he thinks civil servants lack competence, so there’s no harm in cutting their positions,” Moynihan added. “This perspective fails to recognize the importance of public services, their existence, and the benefits they provide to society.”

Moynihan contended that Musk’s approach undermines one of the primary government initiatives of utilizing technology to enhance service and efficiency. He also criticized Musk for contributing to eliminating direct-file options, which offered user-friendly methods for individuals to report taxes, and for plans to file taxes.

Liz Scheller, president of the AFL-CIO, the leading U.S. labor federation, remarked that Doge’s cuts adversely affect workers. She referenced the rapid reductions at the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, indicating that the agency plays a crucial role in ensuring the safety of personal protective equipment for firefighters.

“Doge essentially cuts line items from a spreadsheet, which has real-life implications for real people,” Shuler said. “Federal workers have been treated with blatant indifference, exhibiting nothing but dehumanization and humiliation.”

Gimbel of Yale Budget Lab cautioned about another significant flaw in Doge’s cuts. “One of the government’s responsibilities is to mitigate risks,” she stated. “Ensuring food safety is one such example. Government inspectors help prevent threats like Listeria or Salmonella. Reducing the number of food inspectors won’t lead to immediate increases in illnesses, but it may enhance the chances of outbreaks like Listeria and Salmonella in the ensuing years.”