By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Despite Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) claiming $105 billion in savings, February’s federal spending reached a record $603 billion, a 7% increase year-over-year. While some departments saw spending reductions, increases in areas like health and Social Security offset these gains. Critics argue that DOGE’s impact is negligible compared to the overall budget, and that more drastic measures are needed to address the soaring national debt. The House recently passed a stopgap funding bill with minor spending adjustments, leaving the long-term fiscal outlook uncertain.
Read the original article here
Elon Musk’s much-publicized Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), intended to streamline federal spending, has demonstrably failed to curb the alarming rise in US federal expenditures. Despite claims of saving over $100 billion, the latest Treasury data reveals a record-breaking $603 billion in spending last month. This stark contrast between declared savings and actual spending raises serious questions about the effectiveness, and perhaps even the motives, behind DOGE.
The sheer magnitude of the record spending underscores the futility of attempting to address the deficit solely through minor spending cuts. Even a complete elimination of all federal worker salaries—which constitute only about 4% of the entire federal budget—would leave a trillion-dollar-plus deficit. This clearly indicates that a far more significant issue lies elsewhere.
The real problem, it seems, isn’t excessive spending itself but rather a substantial shortfall in revenue. This suggests a fundamental flaw in the current tax structure, which disproportionately favors the wealthy, leaving the government reliant on increasingly unsustainable levels of borrowing. The focus on minor cuts, while ignoring this critical revenue shortfall, is akin to treating a hemorrhage with a band-aid.
Focusing on trimming programs rather than tackling the systemic issue of revenue is a misguided approach. Examples like the US Parks Service, which boasts a significantly higher economic return than its budget, highlight how cuts can be counterproductive in the long run. Similarly, programs like SNAP (food stamps), which provide a substantial economic multiplier effect, are crucial yet vulnerable to cuts driven by misguided fiscal austerity.
This highlights a pattern of prioritizing cuts to vital social programs while avoiding the politically difficult task of addressing tax loopholes and increasing taxes on the wealthy. Even modest increases, such as targeting those earning over $400,000 annually, could significantly boost government revenue, yet this approach remains politically unpalatable for many.
The perceived success of DOGE’s purported savings of $100 billion seems highly dubious. One should question where exactly these savings are being channeled. It’s possible that such alleged savings are being offset by other increased spending or simply misrepresented in the larger context of overall federal expenditure. Furthermore, the selective targeting of less impactful programs might mask larger structural issues, including the influence of lobbying efforts.
The failure of DOGE to stem the tide of rising federal spending also throws into sharp relief the argument that this entire initiative was a politically motivated move. With the focus on seemingly inconsequential savings, it appears to be more of a smokescreen, deflecting attention from the far larger, systemic issues behind the record spending. The lack of significant changes to the overall budget implies that the priority wasn’t fiscal responsibility but rather another agenda altogether.
Another worrisome aspect is the potential for misuse or misappropriation of funds. Claims of savings could be easily manipulated to obfuscate actual spending, with funds being diverted to less transparent channels. This lack of accountability opens the door to potential corruption and abuse of power. Therefore, greater transparency and oversight of federal finances are crucial.
In conclusion, Elon Musk’s DOGE cuts, even if genuinely resulting in the claimed savings, have proven utterly inadequate to tackle the massive surge in US federal spending. The core issue isn’t excessive spending on the small things but rather a revenue problem stemming from an inequitable tax structure, coupled with a tendency to prioritize politically expedient yet ultimately ineffective cuts to social programs. Until these deeper, structural issues are addressed, the cycle of record-breaking spending and fiscal anxiety will continue unabated.