The DOGE Dilemma of Balancing Cost Savings with Public Needs

By: Muskan Agrawal

The Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, is a newly established federal initiative created by President Donald Trump in January 2025 to reduce government spending. Led by Elon Musk, DOGE is quickly becoming a controversial entity, claiming to have saved over $1 billion in taxpayer money by cutting contracts and programs deemed misaligned with the current administration's priorities.

The department's name, DOGE, is a nod to Musk’s long-standing association with Dogecoin, a cryptocurrency that originated as satire but gained popularity over the years. Housed within the executive branch and built upon the existing U.S. Digital Service framework, DOGE’s mission is to modernize government systems and eliminate what it considers wasteful spending.

One of DOGE’s primary focuses has been canceling diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) contracts across federal agencies, which it claims has already saved taxpayers over $1 billion. Additionally, DOGE sought to curtail foreign aid spending by targeting United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Reports indicate that DOGE officials attempted to gain access to the Treasury Department's payment system to halt payments to USAID, arguing that much of its budget is wasteful. Other actions include terminating specific Social Security Administration initiatives, such as the "Gender X marker" program, which DOGE claims saved $1 million by removing references to gender ideology from public-facing applications. Similarly, DOGE initiated a review of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), halting much of its work and raising questions about the future of consumer protections.

DOGE’s reported savings span several categories. According to the department's claims, $22 billion was saved through the termination of over 7,000 federal contracts. Additionally, the cancellation of nearly 9,300 grants reportedly contributed $32 billion in savings. Lease cancellations added $400 million to the tally, while fraud detection and improper payment deletion efforts account for a staggering $130 billion in claimed savings. Workforce reductions also played a significant role, with layoffs and buyout packages contributing an estimated $75.6 billion in savings. These measures were claimed as evidence of DOGE’s effectiveness in reducing government expenditures.

Despite its claims of cost savings, DOGE is drawing criticism and legal challenges. One major concern revolves around potential conflicts of interest for Elon Musk. Critics argue that Musk’s leadership of DOGE could give him access to sensitive information about competitors’ federal contracts while his own companies continue to receive billions in government funding. This raises ethical questions about whether DOGE’s actions could unfairly benefit Musk’s business ventures. Another area of concern is data security. By gaining access to the Treasury Department’s payment system—containing sensitive personal information about millions of Americans—DOGE sparked fears about potential breaches or misuse of data. Privacy advocates voiced alarm over the lack of transparency regarding how this data might be handled under Musk’s leadership.

DOGE also targeted several agencies for significant layoffs and buyouts, citing inefficiencies and misaligned priorities. For example, the USAID saw approximately 60,000 positions eliminated—50,000 through layoffs and 10,000 through buyouts—as part of DOGE’s efforts to curtail foreign aid spending. Similarly, the Department of Education (DOE) reduced its workforce by nearly 30,000 employees, while the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cut over 28,000 positions. Other agencies impacted include the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), which saw a reduction of 22,000 employees, and the CFPB, where around 13,000 positions were eliminated. These workforce cuts sparked legal challenges and public outcry from advocacy groups concerned about the erosion of critical programs and protections.

Furthermore, DOGE met with resistance from various advocacy groups and government agencies affected by its cuts. Lawsuits have already been filed challenging its action on grounds ranging from data security risks to allegations of overreach in dismantling programs like those under the CFPB. 

As DOGE continues its efforts, it remains both a symbol of aggressive fiscal reform and a lightning rod for controversy. Whether it will achieve lasting efficiency or face further legal and political obstacles remains uncertain. For now, its actions are reshaping conversations around government spending and priorities in unprecedented ways.