Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, who President-elect Trump has put in charge of an initiative to slash the federal government, have mostly been successful in running their own businesses. But their recent column in The Wall Street Journal shows how little they understand about the work federal civil servants do.
The Ramaswamy/Musk effort is just the latest in a long line of official and ad hoc groups organized to reduce government waste. By one account, these efforts have produced 164 reports since the first one in 1905. And that doesn’t even include similar projects at the state level.
The Trump version, which Ramaswamy and Musk dubbed the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), is not a government department of any kind. And, like many of its predecessors, it has no legal authority to cut government spending or staff without action by Congress or the White House.
Deep Promised Cuts
Still, Musk has promised to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget, though he has not specified how long that would take. Trying to do it in one year would require eliminating about two-thirds of all federal spending, excluding Social Security and Medicare benefits, which Trump has vowed to protect; military spending, which enjoy broad bipartisan support; and interest on the debt, which must be paid.
For his part, Ramaswamy says he’d cut 75 percent of the two million-plus federal civilian workers.
Trump’s choice for Treasury Secretary, hedge fund manager Scott Bessent, wants the incoming administration to cut the deficit by more than half, from 6.3 percent of Gross Domestic Product to 3 percent by 2028.
The Consequences
But here is the problem: If the Trump Administration eliminated every single federal civilian employee (excluding the postal service, which operates by separate rules), it would save about $270 billion annually, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The would leave the incoming White House roughly 87 percent short of Musk’s goal, assuming he plans the cuts in one year.
And while even Musk and Ramaswamy have not said they’d wipe out the entire federal workforce, mass federal firings at levels they suggest would have a profound impact on government services. Who would process income tax returns and refunds, pay Social Security benefits, guard the border, provide security at airports, staff the air traffic control system, support veterans, inspect food for safety, or lease federal land to ranchers, drillers, and miners? The list goes on, but you probably get the idea.
The DOGE Formula
In their column, Musk and Ramaswamy say they’d tie the federal headcount to the number of regulations. They wrote, ““A drastic reduction in federal regulations provides sound industrial logic for mass head-count reductions across the federal bureaucracy.”
And, they added, “The number of federal employees to cut should be at least proportionate to the number of federal regulations that are nullified: Not only are fewer employees required to enforce fewer regulations, but the agency would produce fewer regulations once its scope of authority is properly limited.”
There are many problems with this idea. Here is just one: Only a relative handful of government employees actually spend their days writing or even enforcing rules.
Rather, the vast majority distribute benefits or provide direct services to the public.
The Reality
Take the IRS. In fiscal year 2023, it had about 90,000 employees. Of those, less than 1 percent wrote regulations. By contrast, 20,000 staffers provided taxpayer services such as helping people file their returns.
And about those regulations. Many benefit taxpayers by clarifying vague or incomplete language written by Congress, often making it possible for businesses and households to reduce their tax liability. Others, along with the agency’s enforcement staff, curb tax avoidance and outright cheating, and thus make sure people and corporations pay what they owe and help contain the federal deficit.
Or, look at the Department of Veterans Affairs. The VA has about 470,000 employees. About 20,000 are claims examiners and about 8,000 work in IT. But the vast majority are doctors, nurses, social workers, and medical support staff. Trump could fire them all and privatize the VA medical system, but that won’t be easy. And it might not save money. Vice-President elect JD Vance suggested some steps in the that direction during the campaign, but quickly walked back the notion.
The Hill Response
Musk and Ramaswamy may find even Republican lawmakers less than receptive to their ideas. For instance, how many members of Congress would vote to cut those Social Security staffers who make sure their constituents get their correct benefits on time?
The Trump Administration will have plenty of opportunity to save costs and increase efficiency by eliminating some federal regulations—and positions. It even could borrow from the Government Accountability Office’s annual list.
But Musk and Ramaswamy paint an inaccurate picture of what the federal workforce is, what it does, and how much could be saved through prudent restructuring. By doing so, they risk losing credibility with the public and damaging their own efforts.