When Donald Trump vowed to dismantle Washington’s bureaucracy, few expected Elon Musk to lead the charge. Yet, Musk now heads the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a White House task force with a Silicon Valley approach focused on shrinking the federal government.
DOGE’s goals are bold: slashing regulations, cutting trillions from the budget, and restructuring government agencies. Musk and his team aim to cut at least $2 trillion from the projected $7 trillion 2025 budget—a move that would necessitate deep reductions in defense, healthcare, Social Security, and education. As a matter of fact, DOGE’s rapid pace and secrecy have raised concerns. Critics question Musk’s authority, potential conflicts of interest, the legality of its sweeping powers, and whether he can realistically achieve such ambitious cuts.
Musk’s $2 Trillion Dream Meets Fiscal Reality
Elon Musk’s latest ambition—cutting $2 trillion from the federal budget—faces harsh fiscal realities. To put that into perspective, the entire discretionary budget—covering everything from defense to infrastructure—totals around $1.7 trillion. Even eliminating every discretionary program wouldn’t meet Musk’s goal. He insists that cutting fraud, waste, and inefficiencies will yield substantial savings. But even if it were possible to detect and eliminate all fraud in real time—a nearly impossible task—it still wouldn’t get him anywhere near his goal.
Meanwhile, Trump’s fiscal agenda adds complexity, featuring $4.5 trillion in tax cuts, an expanded Defense Department, and pledges to protect Social Security and Medicare. Budget experts agree on the importance of reducing wasteful spending, yet they also recognize that it is not the primary driver of America’s fiscal woes. The actual spending behemoth lies in mandatory expenditures: Social Security, Defense, Medicare, Medicaid, and net interest on the national debt, which consume nearly two-thirds of federal outlays, leaving just a quarter of federal spending technically up for debate.
Yet these programs are politically untouchable, with Trump and both Democrats and Republicans reluctant to even discuss reform. In other words, no matter how aggressively Musk’s DOGE pursues waste, its impact is limited to a sliver of the overall budget.
A review of Treasury data further undermines the narrative that DOGE is making meaningful progress. Since Trump took office, government spending has increased, with daily federal outlays averaging $30 billion—up from $26 billion under Biden. While some cost-cutting measures have been enacted, like scaling back diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, their impact is minimal. Even eliminating USAID, which is projected to save $45 billion annually, would barely register at 0.6% of the budget.
America’s fiscal crisis stems from structural dysfunction, not just about cutting excess. With government spending set to hit $7 trillion in 2025 and mandatory spending projected to reach $4.1 trillion annually, unchecked deficits could push the U.S. toward European-style taxation to sustain European-level government expenditures. Yet, neither party has shown the will to confront this unsustainable trajectory.
Even Musk now recognizes the limits, revising his $2 trillion target to $1 trillion and recently to $500 billion. But trimming inefficiencies won’t be enough—true reform requires rethinking the government’s role and reducing its footprint, not just its inefficiencies.
Elon Musk’s Murky Government Role: A Constitutional Crisis in the Making
Musk’s expanding influence through DOGE raises serious legal and ethical concerns. While the White House labels him a “special government employee,” his actions go beyond mere advisory work. Trump’s executive order rebranded the U.S. Digital Service as the “U.S. DOGE Service” but didn’t grant Musk authority over federal agencies. Yet his team has accessed classified data, influenced public funds, and sidelined USAID. Cutting wasteful aid is necessary, and closing USAID is a good move. However, it must be done legally—Congress, not the administration, has the sole authority to dismantle USAID.
Legal scholars argue Musk’s appointment violates the Constitution’s Appointments Clause, which requires Senate confirmation for officials with executive power. Lawsuits now flooding federal courts seek to block DOGE’s authority, contending that Musk—an unelected billionaire—has been granted unchecked control over key government functions.
Furthermore, Musk’s government role raises conflict-of-interest concerns due to his private business ties. Even as a “special government employee,” Musk must legally distance himself from any matters interfering with his financial interests. His company, X (formerly Twitter), recently partnered with Visa to launch the “X Money Account,” a mobile payment service subject to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) oversight. Now, he is targeting the CFPB itself, further underscoring the conflicts of interest at play.
Musk’s companies have received at least $38 billion in government contracts, loans, tax breaks, and subsidies while facing over 30 federal investigations. His recent push to dismantle regulatory agencies raises concerns that these investigations could be derailed, further fueling fears of abuse of power.
A group of 14 states sued Elon Musk and Donald Trump, challenging the constitutionality of Musk’s White House-granted authority and DOGE. Federal judges will now decide whether DOGE can access Treasury payment systems, which handle trillions in transactions and sensitive data. Lawsuits warn that this access endangers privacy, financial security, and democratic governance. Even Trump admitted the risk, vowing to remove Musk from matters tied to his business, but without oversight, that promise rings hollow.
Conclusion
DOGE’s mission is crucial to preventing the U.S. from slipping into economic stagnation and an unsustainable welfare state. While cutting waste is important, the real challenge lies in addressing the untouched mandatory spending—Defense, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—which consume more than two-thirds of federal expenditures. With $2 trillion in cuts largely impractical, bold reforms are necessary to avoid the dangers of high budget deficit, sluggish growth, and mounting debt.
While DOGE’s objectives are commendable, pursuing them through lawful and institutional means would be far more effective, ensuring lasting reforms that uphold the rule of law and resist future reversals.
Photo by Ussama Azam
