Working within the reality of professional life, justification of actions is an ever-present necessity, and this holds true for employees of federal institutions as well. The most recent cutbacks within the Department of Operational Government Efficiency (DOGE) and the reactions they’ve elicited online have left me somewhat baffled. Isn’t the ultimate objective of our collectively contributed taxes to achieve the maximum possible return on investment? Surely, we don’t enjoy spending on something that fails to deliver the expected value, right?
This issue shouldn’t be divided along political lines; it should be a universal sentiment. Regardless of political affiliation, each one of us should yearn for a government operation that epitomizes efficiency and effectiveness. If we diverge from this frame of reference, the purpose of having governmental bodies becomes questionable.
A wave of protest recently swept through Brevard County, aligned with a nationwide call to action under the banner, ‘We the People will not be silenced!’ Yet, the voice of the public echoed loud and clear in the recent November elections. A desire for change emerged as the predominant sentiment; it was evident that the electorate desired a different approach to governance, considering the prevailing conditions were less than ideal.
Will the current policies and reductions implemented by DOGE succeed? Honestly, it is uncertain. However, the fact that they are trying something divergent from the norm is commendable. If the new strategy does not yield the desired results, or leads to general discontent, the electorate has the freedom to select a different leader in the future.
Many individuals I’ve known in the private sector, colleagues and friends included, have faced the harsh reality of reapplying and battling for their own jobs, with third-party human resources teams determining their fate. Some were unsuccessful. In this context, consider the experience of a unionized construction worker, who faces unemployment and the arduous process of finding new employment once a construction project concludes.
Certain initiatives carried out by DOGE, however, have had unfortunate mishaps. In their process of cost-cutting, they unintentionally slashed funding for vital programs, which later had to be reinstated. So, what is the value of the savings achieved via these cutbacks? Critics rightfully argue the figure has been somewhat ambiguous to this point. However, one must bear in mind that the current administration only took the reins on January 20.
The question of governmental efficiency springs up when scrutinizing federal expenditures. For instance, the federal government sent $59M to New York last year, of which $19M was used to accommodate immigrants who had illegally entered the US in hotel rooms. Does this resonate with anyone as being an optimal utilization of federal funds?
Several programs experienced cuts as well. A total of $1.5M was spent on LGBTQ programs in Serbia, and $24,000 funded an Irish college’s film project on Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion. An opera in Peru-a country oceans away-received $25,000 from the federal coffers. Meanwhile, $2M was allocated for sex-change procedures and trans issues in Guatemala, and $13M (from a proposed $20M) financed a ‘Sesame Street’-style show in Iraq.
In the process of reducing expenditures, it isn’t to say that only non-essential programs faced the brunt. Critics assert that several vital, and even lifesaving, programs were also considerably impacted. In response to this, DOGE contends that certain programs can apply for reinstatement. While the approach may seem abrupt. I don’t foresee any glaring issues so long as these essential programs are indeed restored.
A recent development saw the Florida House Majority Leader, a lawmaker from Brevard, propose a DOGE leadership role in Florida. This emerged from legislation filed to establish a new Cabinet-level position dedicated to detecting and eliminating waste within government operations.
When solicited for an example of a board or commission that could be scrapped or merged as part of DOGE’s reforms, he suggested amalgamating the Gulf of Mexico Regional Fisheries Board with the Marine Fisheries Management currently handled by the Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Similarly, he proposed combining the Board of Cosmetology with the Barbers Board, believing that a single panel for both professions would be more sensible.
Will this make a difference? Who can say for sure? All I know is that despite the fearmongering, the final decision resides with the residents of Florida. For the proposed Commissioner of Government Efficiency role to be established, 60 percent of the residents would have to back the measure in the November 2026 vote. This new position would be tasked with preventing waste, fraud, and abuse, thereby improving governmental efficiency.
There are those who argue that Republicans have exerted control over Florida’s government for the past quarter of a century. However, this doesn’t imply that the former legislators had done an adequate job in curtailing wasteful spending. At the end of the day, every cent the government spends is taxpayers’ money.
I value my hard-earned income, and the prospect of my taxes being spent inefficiently is deeply unsettling. For this reason, I strongly support initiatives to curb wasteful spending and improve overall government efficiency. It is our collective responsibility to ensure our tax money is wisely utilized and that our future governments continue to instill this principle in their operation.