The $220 Billion Lesson: Why “Move Fast and Break Things” Fails in Government
The bill is finally in. Despite promises of slashing trillions, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) didn’t just fail to cut spending – it increased it. A new report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reveals that federal spending rose by $220 billion in fiscal year 2025, a 4% increase, even after accounting for accounting adjustments. This isn’t a glitch; it’s a stark demonstration of why Silicon Valley disruption tactics are catastrophically ill-suited for the complexities of governing a nation.
The Illusion of Efficiency: A Costly Experiment
The initial pitch was simple: apply the “move fast and break things” ethos to the federal bureaucracy. Musk initially claimed DOGE could save $2 trillion, a figure that rapidly dwindled to $1 trillion, then $150 billion. The reality, as documented by the Wall Street Journal and now confirmed by the CBO, is far more sobering. While some minor savings were achieved through grant clawbacks and firing probationary employees, these were dwarfed by the overall increase in spending. The administration even relied on “accounting gimmicks,” like adjustments to student loan programs, to mask the true extent of the failure – a noncash reduction of $131 billion that didn’t represent actual savings.
Beyond Budget Cuts: The Real Drivers of Spending
The DOGE debacle highlights a fundamental misunderstanding of what drives government spending. The biggest expenses – Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid – increased by 8%. These aren’t areas ripe for quick fixes through managerial “disruption.” They’re driven by demographic shifts (an aging population) and rising healthcare costs. Addressing these requires long-term policy solutions, not X-fueled pronouncements about “government waste.” As budget expert Bobby Kogan points out, focusing on these core issues requires serious policy work, something DOGE demonstrably avoided.
The Rehire Crisis: Paying to Undo the “Savings”
Perhaps the most damning evidence of DOGE’s failure isn’t the increased spending, but the scramble to rehire the very employees Musk fired in the name of efficiency. The General Services Administration (GSA) recently “begged” hundreds of former employees to return, admitting the agency was “broken and understaffed” after the cuts. Similar re-hiring waves are occurring at the IRS, Labor Department, and National Park Service. This isn’t streamlining; it’s a costly admission that the entire approach was fundamentally flawed. Taxpayers are now footing the bill for salaries and the costs associated with managing properties and services left to deteriorate during the staffing vacuum.
The Peril of Ideological Destruction
DOGE wasn’t about efficiency; it was about ideological destruction masquerading as fiscal responsibility. The agency wasted at least $21.7 billion in six months while dismantling vital programs based on conspiracy theories found on social media. The elimination of USAID, which had prevented 92 million deaths between 2001 and 2021, is a particularly egregious example. This wasn’t cost-cutting; it was a dangerous gamble with human lives, fueled by misinformation. USAID’s impact report details the agency’s extensive global health and development initiatives.
The Silicon Valley Fallacy: Government Isn’t a Startup
The core problem was a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between running a tech company and governing a complex nation. Musk and his team treated government like an inefficient startup waiting to be “disrupted.” They failed to grasp that government functions aren’t bugs to be fixed, but critical systems that keep society running. In Silicon Valley, breaking a feature can be rolled back with a code update. In government, breaking USAID means lives lost. Firing essential workers creates chaos that costs far more to fix than the original “inefficiency” ever did.
The CBO numbers provide the final, irrefutable proof: DOGE didn’t save money, it cost money. Government spending went up, essential services were destroyed, and taxpayers are left cleaning up the mess. The lesson is clear: “move fast and break things” is a dangerous mantra when applied to the delicate machinery of a democracy. What are your predictions for the future of government efficiency initiatives? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
