FORM D.O.G.E Remove 100 Federal Agencies

To improve governance, it’s critical to reduce the size of government while enhancing its efficiency. A smaller government, with streamlined functions, is less prone to generating unnecessary rules and regulations. The current incentive structure, where the size of the workforce correlates with the production of redundant policies, can be reformed through a reduction in government employees. By doing so, we not only reduce administrative overhead but also create a more focused, responsive, and efficient government that prioritizes the essential needs of the public over bureaucratic expansion. This approach encourages innovation, optimizes resources, and ensures that government serves as an effective steward of public interest without unnecessary complexity.

Currently 440 Agencies and Departments exist.

https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies

5 Likes

In order for this to work, there needs to be a staff at each agency dedicated to cutting out waste with some sort of leverage/incentive for that team to serve the interest of eliminating the deficit and debt. Otherwise you’ll get a couple scenarios:

  1. The D.O.G.E. will come up with recommendations but be unable to execute on them.
  2. The agencies will offer up cuts in critical programs, causing everyone to believe cutting is impossible because the impact would hurt too much.
  3. Some eliminations will be impossible because they need regulatory change from the agency, and the agency has no incentive to do that. The separate team would have skilled staff to change regulations.
2 Likes

I disagree with terminating a large amount of the federal government civilian workforce.

One of the main demographics of consumers who generate revenue in large and smaller cities – which keeps small and larger businesses open and able to employ people who contribute to local and state economies – is government workers.

If a large amount of these civil servants, who help to keep our government providing vital services from Maine to Hawaii, are suddenly unemployed, there is a large likelihood of numerous business districts going out of business. Unemployment rate soaring to above 15% and major loss in GDP is likely an outcome of this.

In Washington, DC, numerous businesses closed when most workers went remote in 2020. Even through 2021 and 22, the city lost a billion dollars in revenue and commercial taxes due to closed businesses that shuttered when there was a lack of regular customers, who were mostly government workers. Even though the city has since reopened, it still hasn’t recovered from losses caused by less government workers buying. This wasn’t due to workers being fired, just them being temporarily remote. Imagine the unemployment caused by closed businesses from up to half of the government being permanently eliminated.

There are also a lot of contractors for the government located all across the country, who would also suffer unemployment and inability to provide services like support for our defense and infrastructure.

There is a chain and domino effect to be taken into careful consideration before anything like this would be feasible in reality.

While it’s true that government workers and contractors contribute to the economy, it’s important to remember that the government is not a welfare program for local businesses. The primary purpose of government agencies should be to serve the public and ensure the efficient use of taxpayer money. The intention behind eliminating or restructuring certain federal agencies is not simply to terminate employees, but to refocus government efforts on tasks that genuinely benefit society.

If employees are moved from redundant or non-essential roles to positions where they can contribute to more impactful and meaningful work, this creates a more effective government. It also means taxpayer dollars are spent more wisely, supporting services that make a real difference rather than maintaining jobs that exist primarily to uphold local economies.

The economic effects you mentioned, such as unemployment and business closures, are important considerations. However, the solution isn’t to keep unnecessary agencies afloat to avoid short-term economic disruption, but to ensure that public funds are used for essential services that benefit the country as a whole. Economic impacts can be addressed through thoughtful transition plans, retraining programs, and support for businesses to adapt. The focus should be on building a government that is leaner, more efficient, and better equipped to meet society’s needs, rather than perpetuating inefficiencies that ultimately cost the public more in the long run.

Restructuring the GS schedule to include performance-based incentives could effectively attract talent and boost employee motivation. Doubling salaries for high performance, coupled with clear, measurable goals, would align contributions with agency missions. Establishing an oversight body is essential to ensure transparency, fairness, and prevent bias or corruption in the assessment process. Careful design of performance metrics and pay structures, along with continuous oversight, will ensure the system remains fair, merit-based, and aligned with the goal of enhancing government efficiency and service delivery.

America has already been a country with a smaller government. It wasnt nearly as effective then as it is now. With more people living in the country now than ever before, the demands have increased over time and it grew out of necessity.

Sure, we could, for example, only have the FAA manage all aviation affairs and have their own investigative branch when there are incidents and accidents, but the NTSB has people capable of that in all transportation incidents in addition to only aviation. So the NTSB is the center of transportation investigation and improvement, and are often first on the scene of major transit incidents. And then theres NHTSA, national highway transportation safety, that enforces regulations and standards that have vastly improved road and vehicle safety over the last several decades.

How would restructuring or removing agencies like those be beneficial to the public’s safety? There’s always room for improvement anywhere, but when we start discussing the permanent removal of manpower (knowledge, creativity, skills, etc) that provides vital services, the question of diminishing standards of safety as an outcome should be considered above all else.

There is no efficiency in a civilization where there is a lack of adequate safety standards, and a lack of governance to create, apply and enforce them.

Every government employee serves a purpose that contributes to what each agency is doing. In my experience working in government (non-federal) for the last 10 years, there has not been a position that was funded to serve no purpose nor contribution. Over time, some of those jobs even were eliminated or repurposed for something else more modern to adjust with the changing times. The process for getting funding for positions in itself requires justifying every single year, so there tends to be cuts and reductions in force already to save on costs of payroll and benefits. Only the jobs that are necessary are approved.

Every part serves a purpose. An agency like Energy, for example, is not only staffing itself with scientists, but there are other parts of that wheel that require more manpower behind the scenes so those scientists can do their jobs. Being behind the scenes doesn’t make these jobs unimportant or unnecessary waste. There are attorneys who act as counsel to the agency, consulting and protecting the agency from violating laws. Those attorneys and scientists have people in charge of maintaining organizational history/records. Those people are supported by system administrators and teams of IT staff that manage the various databases where info is stored, websites, networks, etc. There are teams of investigators and advisors and engineers, and analysts behind them, and information officers and numerous support positions that help them do their jobs. Everyone from the deputies to the custodians are serving a purpose in that agency’s ability to function, and every other agency works similarly, and often understaffed, contrary to the opinion that there are too many government workers.

So it becomes crucial to understand how each agency works and is connected to other agencies, and understand their purpose and the work of their staff, before determining that they are merely performative and a source of welfare to local economies.

I can’t name five federal agencies that are proven to be obsolete, but perhaps a deep audit of 3 million federal employees would be necessary if the goal is to remove what’s considered to be wasteful work. That’s the only way, and a costly one in terms of money, time and man hours, that likely won’t result in the desired outcome of more efficiency at all.

This doesn’t include the 24 million non-federal government employees whose work at the local and state level are parallel to and often depends on federal collaboration and support. Then you have a trickle-down domino effect in play that hurts local and state economies, causing massive and widespread disruptions that there will be less than half of a government available to manage. I don’t see any efficiency in that, but the opposite is more likely to happen instead.

I appreciate your response and the thoughtful engagement with the issue. However, I’d encourage a deeper review of the list of federal agencies and their roles. With over 1.3 million federal employees, it’s evident that the sheer scale of government bureaucracy opens the door for inefficiencies, mismanagement, and even corruption. Fraud, waste, and abuse have reached unprecedented levels, eroding public trust in our institutions. The presence of redundancy, coupled with a lack of accountability, only exacerbates these problems.

One glaring issue is the compensation structure for federal employees. The fact that they are often paid low wages is a fundamental failure of human capital management. When workers are undervalued, motivation declines, talent is harder to retain, and inefficiency thrives. We likely need more federal employees, but adding them to a broken system without reform will only worsen the problem. A more streamlined, accountable approach is necessary to make the federal workforce more effective.

With the rise of AI, the federal government is on the cusp of a significant transformation, as AI-enabled employees begin to take on roles previously held by human workers. This shift presents a critical opportunity to address the deep-rooted inefficiencies and mismanagement in the system. But this can only be successful if it is coupled with systemic reform to ensure that AI is used ethically, efficiently, and transparently. The time to address these issues is now, before they become entrenched.

It’s important to recognize that the federal government was never originally designed by the states to take on many of the roles it now performs. Overreach and mission creep have led to a federal apparatus that is far removed from its intended purpose. This disconnect is partly why we see an increase in foreign malign influence operations exploiting vulnerabilities across American society. The solution isn’t just to add more employees or embrace new technologies like AI—it’s to fundamentally reimagine how government works. America needs a government 2.0, one that is built for the challenges of the modern age, with accountability, efficiency, and innovation at its core.

As we move forward, it’s worth reflecting on other instances where federal bureaucracy has swelled to the detriment of efficiency. Take, for example, the persistent underperformance in managing natural resources like the Great Lakes. Despite numerous agencies, overlapping jurisdictions, and billions in funding, significant environmental challenges remain unsolved. It’s a microcosm of the broader issue: a sprawling, inefficient system lacking the agility to tackle the most pressing issues of our time.

As of now, 440 Agencies and Departments exist, 100 can easily be scrapped.

https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies

1 Like

the Argentinian president actually did eliminate unnecessary ones right away, that a good example