Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

How Government Efficiency Is Supposed To Work

Opinion

American flag and money
Javier Ghersi/Getty Images

We’ve seen in the last few months a disastrous display of what happens when amateurs run amok with government resources. The destruction caused by Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) crew has harmed the lives of possibly millions of people and will take years to rectify. Some estimates suggest that thousands, if not tens of thousands, of lives have been lost due to the cut in foreign assistance. The Partnership for Public Service, the primary nonprofit advocating for federal employees, has suggested that the so-called “cuts” will result in the government spending more money, not less, due to lost productivity and the departure of experienced workers.

Yet this month, we got an example of what actual government oversight and genuine cost-cutting look like. The House of Representatives Subcommittee on Government Operations held a hearing with the sexy title, “Safeguarding Procurement: Examining Fraud Risk Management in the Department of Defense.” The hearing included the Inspector General of the Department of Defense (DOD) and an expert with the Government Accountability Office (GAO). For policy wonks in D.C., the GAO is often called the last honest person in Washington. They thoroughly investigate how tax dollars are spent and study how to improve the efficiency of government programs. (Wait … wasn’t that supposed to be the mission of DOGE?)


From 2017 through 2024, the GAO found $10.7 billion in “confirmed fraud, and developed 17 recommendations to improve the financial management of the department. This is not small potatoes – the Pentagon is responsible for half of all discretionary spending and 82 percent of the government’s “total physical assets” (that bureaucrat talk for “stuff we buy”).

The two-hour hearing featured thoughtful and intelligent questions from Democrats and Republicans as they jointly explored the research on the topic and discussed ways to achieve taxpayer savings. The Chairman of the subcommittee, Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), and the top Democrat, Rep. Kweisi Mfume (D-Maryland), calmly and clearly outlined their intention to work in a bipartisan manner. “We made the determination that Mr. Mfume and the Democrats intend to forthrightly address this issue and come up with real answers, and we’re going to work on this together,” Rep. Sessions said. “Working together is something that we on this side of the aisle look forward to,” Rep. Mfume said.

Unlike DOGE, instead of coming up with fantasy contracts and false savings, the GAO found actual fraud in financial management, including:

  • $200 million in stolen funds by a contractor who misrepresented their ownership status.
  • Bribes from a contract to Navy officials defrauded the government of millions of dollars.
  • A contractor selling the government defective parts, resulting in the grounding of 47 F-15 fighter jets.

The GAO also found that the Pentagon was dragging its feet and delaying the implementation of the recommendations. Only four of the 17 recommendations were implemented, and over a seven-month period, the DOD delayed launching a revised fraud risk management strategy five times. This may sound boring, but good governance that leads to solid results often is boring.

DOGE claims its work has saved taxpayers $160 billion. Instead, according to the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service, DOGE has cost the taxpayer $135 billion by putting tens of thousands of federal employees on paid leave, rehiring mistakenly fired workers, and resulting in lost productivity. The Yale Budget Lab estimates that proposed cuts in staff at the IRS will result in $160 billion in lost revenue to the Treasury due to reduced collections and fewer taxpayer audits.

Genuine government improvement doesn’t come with a narcissistic billionaire wielding a chainsaw and unleashing untrained techies to wreak havoc with the federal government. It comes from experts, with deep knowledge of how the government works and with a patriotic commitment to making it work better. The sooner the Trump Administration figures out that immutable reality of governance, the sooner they’ll find actual savings for the American public.

Bradford Fitch is a former Capitol Hill staffer, former CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation, and author of “Citizens’ Handbook for Influencing Elected Officials.”



Read More

​Teal shoes are displayed outside Naval Medical Center Portsmouth

Teal shoes are displayed outside Naval Medical Center Portsmouth in April 2018 as part of Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month.

Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Kris R. Lindstrom/U.S. Navy

Military Sexual Trauma Survivors Can’t Sue the Government. A New Bill Could Change That.

When Mayra Diaz opened the door of her Army barracks room in 2022, she didn’t realize it was the beginning of the end of her military career.

She had never met the soldier standing in front of her, Sgt. Greville Clarke. She didn’t know he had sexually assaulted three other women on base over the past 15 months, including one he threatened at knifepoint.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Horizontal photo of a DEMOCRATIC PARTY FLAG

Horizontal photo of a DEMOCRATIC PARTY FLAG with a stylized DONKEY with 3 white stars on blue top of donkey and two red feet. Flag is laying on top of a red, white, and blue American Flag.

Getty Images

How to Define the Democratic Party - Left or Centrist?

Labels can be misleading and misused. The label "Centrist" is empowering because it signifies you are mainstream, not extreme, a place where all people can come together. To be labeled "Left" is to place you outside the mainstream, extreme; left connotes a kind of kookiness as well as—horror of horrors—Socialism.

But are the labels accurate? For most of the 20th century, the Democratic Party was, without question, the party that championed the working man, the average person—the people. But they were nevertheless firm capitalists—they were not Socialists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Illustration of US Capitol

Illustration of US Capitol

Illustration provided

Are States and Localities Required to Cooperate with ICE?

Polls show a majority of Americans disapprove of how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is doing its job, with outrage stoked by a surge in immigration arrests across the country and multiple killings by federal immigration officials. In many places, residents are against their state and local officials cooperating with immigration authorities. And many local law enforcement leaders argue that cooperating with federal immigration enforcement operations undermines public safety by taking resources away from local priorities and eroding communities’ trust in law enforcement.

Trump administration officials have repeatedly argued that states and localities are legally obligated to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts. They have also warned that state and local laws limiting cooperation with ICE will be met with harsh crackdowns.

Keep ReadingShow less
people in a boardroom


Happy female entrepreneur with colleagues sitting at a desk in an office

Getty images

Understanding The Dissolution of Federal DEI Offices and Initiatives: Debate and Implications

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Background

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) is a buzzword often used in political spaces, and its implementations, or lack thereof, have repercussions on many groups. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts are organizational policies and initiatives that aim to equitably distribute opportunities and to create accepting workplaces for marginalized populations. These policies create hiring and recruitment guidelines to hire, retain, and promote individuals from those backgrounds. Supporters of these policies argue they are necessary in driving meaningful social progress, while critics argue they subordinate the role of merit in awarding opportunities.

Keep ReadingShow less