Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Congress Bill Spotlight: BAD DOGE Act

News

Congress Bill Spotlight: BAD DOGE Act

U.S. President Donald Trump listens as White House Senior Advisor, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, speaks next to a Tesla Cyber Truck and a Model S on the South Lawn of the White House on March 11, 2025, in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

The Fulcrum introduces Congress Bill Spotlight, a weekly report by Jesse Rifkin, focusing on the noteworthy legislation of the thousands introduced in Congress. Rifkin has written about Congress for years, and now he's dissecting the most interesting bills you need to know about, but that often don't get the right news coverage.

Though it’s been cutting left and right, could DOGE itself be cut next?



The Bill

The BAD DOGE Act would repeal Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. The acronym BAD DOGE, a pun on the pet reprimand “bad dog,” stands for Bolstering American Democracy and Demanding Oversight and Government Ethics.

The House bill was introduced on February 24 by Rep. Dave Min (D-CA47). No Senate companion version appears to have been introduced yet.

Context

Elon Musk, the richest person on earth by a wide margin, leads President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency. Despite its name, DOGE is not actually an official “department,” but a special unit tasked with reducing bureaucracy, fraud, and waste.

(The acronym DOGE comes from an internet joke referencing a digital cryptocurrency called dogecoin, which Musk had previously promoted.)

In its nascent existence, DOGE certainly courted controversy. First, for moving to defund or eliminate USAID, which provides food and healthcare to low-income nations overseas, but which Musk called “a criminal organization” and accused of corruption. Then, for seeking access to millions of American taxpayers’ personal information through the IRS.

Many criticize Musk personally, for wielding political power despite not being elected himself, nor even being Senate-confirmed like Cabinet members. Others accuse Musk of using his position to benefit himself and his companies: for example, proposing to eliminate an electric vehicle tax credit that Tesla’s auto competitors use, or steering more NASA contracts towards SpaceX.

However, a few of DOGE’s ideas have also received bipartisan praise or at least bipartisan consideration, such as ending daylight savings time and discontinuing production of the penny. Not long after Musk first suggested it, Trump ordered the government to stop minting new pennies, even earning some Democratic support.

Congressional Democrats have tried to subpoena Musk, joined protests against him, asked viral questions about him during committee hearings, written letters about him to top government officials, and confronted the Speaker of the House in his office about Musk. But in terms of actual legislation, as the minority party in both chambers, there’s not much they can do.

What Supporters Say

Supporters argue that the government provides important – sometimes lifesaving – resources, which are now being eliminated by unaccountable and arguably unconstitutional means.

“Elon Musk and DOGE are attacking the very foundations of our democracy,” Rep. Min said in a press release. “An unelected and unvetted billionaire violating our privacy and deleting federal agencies does not promote good governance, it violates the Constitution. [The bill would] rein in the blatantly illegal and unconstitutional activities.”

What Opponents Say

Musk himself counters that DOGE stands against an ever-metastasizing government bureaucracy, which wastes too much of people’s hard-earned money.

He also contends that D.C.-area feds too often go against mass public opinion. After all, Republicans just won the White House and Congress, yet Democrats won more than 90% of Washington, D.C.’s presidential vote.

“If you say ‘What is the goal of DOGE?’ I think a significant part of this presidency is to restore democracy,” Musk said in remarks alongside Trump from the Oval Office. “This is not to say that there aren’t some good people who are in the federal bureaucracy, but you can’t have an autonomous federal bureaucracy. You have to have one that’s responsive to the people. That’s the whole point of a democracy.”

Similar Bills

House Democrats have also introduced other similar bills targeting DOGE, though without repealing it entirely. Here are five:

  1. The Taxpayer Data Protection Act would ban DOGE’s actions at the IRS, though not everything it’s been doing throughout the rest of the government. Introduced by Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI11), it’s attracted exactly 200 cosponsors, all Democrats.
  2. The MERIT Act would reinstate all federal workers fired by DOGE, with back pay. The acronym MERIT stands for Model Employee Reinstatement for Ill-advised Termination. Introduced by Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ10), it’s attracted 71 Democratic cosponsors.
  3. The Stop Musk Act would protect federal employees from legal retaliation if they attempt to thwart DOGE. Introduced by freshman Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-OR3), as her very first bill, it’s attracted three Democratic cosponsors.
  4. The LEASH DOGE Act would require DOGE to publicly list all its employees and advisors. The acronym LEASH DOGE stands for Legislative Enforcement Against Setbacks from Harmful DOGE. Introduced by Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA10), it’s attracted 17 Democratic cosponsors.
  5. The CLEAR Act would make DOGE subject to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, so more information about it could be released to the public when asked. The acronym CLEAR stands for Consistent Legal Expectations and Access to Records. Introduced by Rep. Hillary Scholten (D-MI3), it’s attracted 51 Democratic cosponsors.

Odds of Passage

The BAD DOGE Act to repeal it entirely has attracted five cosponsors, all Democrats. It awaits an unlikely vote in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, controlled by Republicans.

The Opposite Bill

Vice versa, a Republican bill would codify DOGE in federal law, making it harder for Congress or a future president to repeal.

That bill, which does not have a title, was introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA48) and has attracted one Republican: Rep. Cory Mills (R-FL7). It awaits a potential vote in the same House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Jesse Rifkin is a freelance journalist with the Fulcrum. Don’t miss his weekly report, Congress Bill Spotlight, every Friday on the Fulcrum. Rifkin’s writings about politics and Congress have been published in the Washington Post, Politico, Roll Call, Los Angeles Times, CNN Opinion, GovTrack, and USA Today.

SUGGESTIONS:

Congress Bill Spotlight: Panama Canal Repurchase Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: Make Greenland Great Again Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: BIG OIL from the Cabinet Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: renaming Gulf of Mexico as “Gulf of America”

Congress Bill Spotlight: constitutional amendment letting Trump be elected to a third term

Congress Bill Spotlight: adding Donald Trump’s face to Mount Rushmore

Read More

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

President Donald Trump speaks at a White House press briefing on Jan. 30, 2025.

Credit: Jonah Elkowitz/Medill News Service

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

WASHINGTON — Paul Ingrassia withdrew his nomination to lead the Office of Special Counsel on Tuesday night after facing Republican pushback over past controversial statements.

While Ingrassia joins a growing list of President Donald Trump’s nominees who have withdrawn from consideration, many who have aired controversial beliefs or lack requisite qualifications have still been appointed or are still in the nomination process.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making
low light photography of armchairs in front of desk

A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making

The dysfunction of today’s federal government is not simply the product of political division or individual leaders; it is rooted in the internal rules of Congress itself. The Founders, in one of their few major oversights, granted Congress the authority to make its own procedural rules (Article I, Section 5) without establishing any framework for how it should operate. Over time, this blank check has produced a legislative process built to serve partisan power, not public representation.

The result is a Congress that often rewards obstruction and gridlock over compromise and action. The Founders imagined representatives closely tied to their constituents—one member for every 30,000 to 50,000 citizens. Today, that ratio has ballooned to one for every 765,000 in the House, and in the Senate, each member can represent tens of millions (e.g., California). As the population has grown, representation has become distant and impersonal, while procedural rules have tightened the grip of party leadership. Major issues can no longer reach the floor unless the majority party permits it. The link between citizens and decisions has nearly vanished.

Keep ReadingShow less
Lasting peace requires accepting Israel’s right to exist

US President Donald Trump hailed a "tremendous day for the Middle East" as he and regional leaders signed a declaration on Oct. 13, 2025, meant to cement a ceasefire in Gaza, hours after Israel and Hamas exchanged hostages and prisoners. (TNS)

Lasting peace requires accepting Israel’s right to exist

President Trump took a rhetorical victory lap in front of the Israeli parliament Monday. Ignoring his patented departures from the teleprompter, which violated all sorts of valuable norms, it was a speech Trump deserved to give. The ending of the war — even if it’s just a ceasefire — and the release of Israel’s last living hostages is, by itself, a monumental diplomatic accomplishment, and Trump deserves to take a bow.

Much of Trump’s prepared text was forward-looking, calling for a new “golden age” for the Middle East to mirror the one allegedly unfolding here in America. I’m generally skeptical about “golden ages,” here or abroad, and especially leery about any talk about “everlasting peace” in a region that has known “peace” for only a handful of years since the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

Keep ReadingShow less
A child looks into an empty fridge-freezer in a domestic kitchen.

The Trump administration’s suspension of the USDA’s Household Food Security Report halts decades of hunger data tracking.

Getty Images, Catherine Falls Commercial

Trump Gives Up the Fight Against Hunger

A Vanishing Measure of Hunger

Consider a hunger policy director at a state Department of Social Services studying food insecurity data across the state. For years, she has relied on the USDA’s annual Household Food Security Report to identify where hunger is rising, how many families are skipping meals, and how many children go to bed hungry. Those numbers help her target resources and advocate for stronger programs.

Now there is no new data. The survey has been “suspended for review,” officially to allow for a “methodological reassessment” and cost analysis. Critics say the timing and language suggest political motives. It is one of many federal data programs quietly dropped under a Trump executive order on so-called “nonessential statistics,” a phrase that almost parodies itself. Labeling hunger data “nonessential” is like turning off a fire alarm because it makes too much noise; it implies that acknowledging food insecurity is optional and reveals more about the administration’s priorities than reality.

Keep ReadingShow less