Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Congress Bill Spotlight: BAD DOGE Act

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

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

U.S. President Donald Trump takes the stage during a reception for Republican members of the House of Representatives in the East Room of the White House on July 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump thanked GOP lawmakers for passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

What are the new Medicaid work requirements, and are they more lenient or more restrictive than what previously existed?

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Constitution
Imagining constitutions
Douglas Sacha/Getty Images

A Bold Civic Renaissance for America’s 250th

Every September 17, Americans mark Constitution Day—the anniversary of the signing of our nation’s foundational charter in 1787. The day is often commemorated with classroom lessons and speaking events, but it is more than a ceremonial anniversary. It is an invitation to ask: What does it mean to live under a constitution that was designed as a charge for each generation to study, debate, and uphold its principles? This year, as we look toward the semiquincentennial of our nation in 2026, the question feels especially urgent.

The decade between 1776 and 1787 was defined by a period of bold and intentional nation and national identity building. In that time, the United States declared independence, crafted its first national government, won a war to make their independence a reality, threw out the first government when it failed, and forged a new federal government to lead the nation. We stand at a similar inflection point. The coming decade, from the nation’s semiquincentennial in 2026 to the Constitution’s in 2037, offers a parallel opportunity to reimagine and reinvigorate our American civic culture. Amid the challenges we face today, there’s an opportunity to study, reflect, and prepare to write the next chapters in our American story—it is as much about the past 250 years, as it is about the next 250 years. It will require the same kind of audacious commitment to building for the future that was present at the nation’s outset.

Keep ReadingShow less