Analysis

So much uncertainty about Doge, the US Department of Efficiency

The aim of dismantling the federal bureaucratic machine and drastically cutting its costs is proving to be deceptive and slippery

18 April 2025

3' min read

It is called Doge. This is the acronym - from the meme 'doge', the same as the cryptocurrency Dogecoin (?) - of the new Department of government efficiency created by US President Donald Trump with the aim of dismantling the federal bureaucratic machine and drastically cutting its costs (to the tune of $2 trillion). A mission at the limits of the impossible (the federal budget is $7 trillion), in full 'Trump style' ('making the impossible is what we do best'). At the head of the Doge, there could only be a 'doge' by the name of Elon Musk.

Nomen omen, said the Latins. The name expresses who we are and our destiny. An adage that also applies to democracies and their institutions.

Let us start, then, with the name, Doge, a name that immediately proves misleading. There is, in fact, no department. According to the executive order of 20 January 2025, the Doge is, at least formally, a time-limited organisation, within the meaning of §3161, Title 5, US code, 'sunset' in that it is destined to sunset on 4 July 2026. A span of 18 months to complete the President's so-called Doge Agenda.

A doubly misleading name: for it, the United States digital service (Usds) is renamed United States Doge Service. An almost invisible change: the commonly used acronym Usds remains unchanged. Yet, as a Trojan horse, the new USDS bears the Doge. A path that began during the Biden-Trump interregnum, when the Doge began to creep into the USDS apparatus. All in an almost surreptitious manner, so much so that, as the officials involved themselves reveal, the Signal application was chosen for communications because of its automatic message deletion system. Thanks to these deceptive entanglements, others become possible: on the one hand, the top Doge, although formally an Usds administrator, is placed under the umbrella, and the protection, of the office of the President; on the other hand, the obligatory creation of internal Doge teams within each federal administration offers the Doge the way to insinuate himself into them.

Nomen omen, then? If the Doge's mission is the efficiency of the federal bureaucratic machine, this 'efficiency' is proving to be as deceptive and slippery as the name.

Deceptive, first of all, because it is not transparent: if the Internet page churns out data and numbers on a daily basis, it is unverifiable information, sometimes even clamorously wrong (just think of the famous 8 billion cuts that turned out to be only 8 million), or clearly misleading, such as the index of unconstitutionality, which measures the number of regulations made by federal agencies (by "unelected bureaucrats" as one reads on the site) in relation to the number of laws made by Congress (the ratio is now 18.5 to 1). Not surprisingly, it is precisely on transparency that one of the legal battlefronts open against the Doge is being played out (with the recent recognition of his subjection to the Freedom of Information Act).

Deceptive, however, above all, and paradoxically, because it is inefficient: inefficient and problematic is the dismantling of federal agencies and the massive outflow of employees (75,000 through the so-called 'Fork in the road' programme alone, similar to the one used by Musk after he joined Twitter), so much so as to force sudden U-turns. This was also the case with the 90% cut to the Usaid programme, on which the Supreme Court had to intervene. Musk himself now admits that 85% of the cuts are not feasible.

Nomen, omen...homo. The veil of uncertainty that envelops the Doge also envelops his doge, Elon Musk, who has so far used this uncertainty as an instrument of power, circumventing rules and constraints. Yet he too is caught between two fronts: an external one, with 14 American states claiming the unconstitutionality of his appointment under the so-called appointment clause of Article 2(2) of the US Constitution; an internal one, and perhaps more dangerous, to which President Trump has offered the reassurance that Musk is no more than a mere advisor.

This American lesson teaches us, as Italians and Europeans, that for the efficiency of the public machine (the key objective of the NRP and the European Competitiveness Compass) there are no shortcuts, nor are hypocrisies worthwhile. Those who play the pretence of efficiency are sooner or later unmasked.

Full Professor of Administrative Law, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart

Brand connect

I prossimi eventi

Tutti gli eventi

Notizie e approfondimenti sugli avvenimenti politici, economici e finanziari.

Comments

So much uncertainty about Doge, the US Department of Efficiency

The aim of dismantling the federal bureaucratic machine and drastically cutting its costs is proving to be deceptive and slippery

Brand connect

I prossimi eventi

Newsletter