The meticulous analysis debunking DOGE's $55 billion savings claim illustrates a critical point, but it doesn’t take into account the hidden costs of all the damage being done. While it is such important work to show how DOGE's math fails even on its own terms - from phantom savings on contracts that weren't actually canceled to inflated figures that exceed the maximum possible savings - the real numbers are even worse than the $7 billion figure that Sharon’s thorough analysis has already reduced it to. Possibly less than zero would be accurate?
Let's do some basic math: Start with that $7 billion in supposed savings. Now subtract the immediate, quantifiable costs of this reckless approach:
- The administrative costs of processing mass terminations
- The legal expenses from inevitable wrongful termination suits
- The higher future costs of restarting critical programs
- The expense of rebuilding lost institutional knowledge
- The cost of repeating work that was abandoned mid-process
These alone would eliminate most if not all of the claimed savings. But the true scope of waste and damage runs far deeper: There is the economic cost of the lives lost, livelihoods ruined, and preventable diseases spread. (BTW I'm ignoring the enormous moral value of these lives and communities for the sake of staying on topic of the national budget, obviously value doesn't only come in the form of $.)
In "Veterans Left Behind, Millions Spent on Confederate Names, and Europe on Edge," Sharon revealed how DOGE's attack on the VA exemplifies this destructive approach. They're firing medical personnel who had outstanding performance reviews, after investing years in their specialized training, security clearances, and institutional knowledge. The VA claims these layoffs will save $98 million annually, but they're making these cuts while suffering from major staffing shortages - meaning they'll eventually need to spend even more to recruit and train replacements. Meanwhile, they're simultaneously spending $62.5 million to rename military bases, only to spend that amount again to rename them back.
I was just listening to the “Science Vs” podcast, a research-backed science show, which has documented an even more devastating pattern across other agencies in their recent episode “The War on Science". It uncovered thousands of scientists being terminated at the CDC and NIH, with research worth hundreds of millions being abandoned mid-stream. The University of Washington's medical school stands to lose $90-110 million in funding, much of it for clinical trials that are nearly complete. At St. Jude's Children's Research Hospital, cuts to NIH funding would cost nearly $40 million annually, with their cancer center director warning bluntly: "More children will die." The podcast identified over 30 frozen studies where volunteers were already under researcher care, including malaria treatment trials for children under 5 in Mozambique, tuberculosis treatment studies in Peru and South Africa, and critical HIV vaccine research.
The cascading institutional damage is equally severe. Science Vs revealed how scientists are desperately trying to preserve terabytes of vital health data before it disappears, including critical information that helped control the recent monkeypox outbreak. They documented how researchers knew exactly which communities were most at risk because they had detailed data on infection patterns - data that's now being fragmented or deleted under Trump’s directives. And why is this data being deleted? Somebody decided that keywords like “systemic” or “women” are too woke and any work using it should be destroyed.
The dismantling of USAID shows how these impacts extend far beyond our borders. Research participants around the world have been suddenly abandoned, destroying trust in American institutions and partnerships that took decades to build. People on experimental treatments have been left without care, and promising research into preventing future pandemics has been halted mid-stream.
Having unqualified DOGE staff - who lack both subject matter expertise and basic understanding of government operations - making these sweeping decisions compounds the damage. The combination of mathematical errors in their claimed savings and complete disregard for true costs reveals this as political theater.
This human toll has profound economic consequences too. Each preventable death represents not just a moral tragedy but the loss of economic productivity, tax revenue, and societal contribution. The CDC estimates that preventing just one premature death from cancer creates approximately $1 million in economic value. Pandemic prevention yields even greater returns - with studies showing that every dollar invested in public health preparedness saves $13-15 in avoided costs. Maintaining vaccination programs prevents billions in healthcare costs and economic disruption.
By that measure, DOGE's actions represent not savings, but an unprecedented destruction of public value and capability that will take years, if not decades, to rebuild - if we can rebuild it at all.
Not to mention the distrust anyone with skill and talent might have long term about being employed by or contacting with the federal government. We will lose out on entire generations of smart people, who used to do the work at less than market rate for the benefit of stability and being able to work on projects that are designed to help people without a profit motive in mind. This is designed to destroy the entire structure of the government, such that *if* important work gets done, it goes to for profit entities. The public will no longer have any interest or right to that work.
Yes! I hear "we're saving so much money" but then trump goes to the Superbowl? They're saving nothing, lying about it and then participating in things that cost tax payer money!
I listened to an interesting podcast from NYT's The Daily with Ruben Gallego about why most people don't care about DT going to the Super Bowl and the money spent. It had a lot of other brain tingles in there as well. It's just one person's opinion but he won in a district that DT won as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85qWjka-Bmg
That's a really good point, Kelly - I hadn't even considered the unemployment benefits angle!
From what I understand, federal unemployment insurance works a bit differently than the private sector. Federal agencies don't pay unemployment taxes like private employers do. Instead, when a federal employee is laid off and successfully claims unemployment, the benefits are paid by the specific federal agency that employed them. Those payments come directly from each agency's budget, which means they're additional costs that would offset any supposed "savings" from the layoffs.
This is important because an agency like the VA that claims to be saving $98 million by cutting staff would actually save considerably less once you factor in the unemployment benefits they'll have to pay. Depending on the state where the employee files and their salary level, this could cost thousands per terminated employee.
I believe federal employees generally qualify for unemployment benefits when terminated through no fault of their own (like these DOGE layoffs). Even terminations that cite performance issues rather than misconduct would typically still qualify for unemployment benefits - poor performance alone usually isn't disqualifying. They typically wouldn't qualify only if they were fired for serious misconduct or if they quit voluntarily.
It's obviously a good thing that unemployment coverage exists for these DOGE casualties - people shouldn't lose their livelihoods because of political decisions. But as always, there's a deep irony here: taxpayers are now funding unemployment benefits for workers removed from necessary positions that will eventually need to be refilled... paid for by those same taxpayers. So we're essentially paying twice - once for the person not to work, and again to recruit and train their eventual replacement. Efficiency indeed! 🥲
Kelly, I’ve seen conflicting reports on if they’re allowed to claim unemployment, I’ve seen some say they can’t because they were terminated for performance reasons. I haven’t found anything to say one way or another. Have you found anything that shows they do? I am hoping they do bc it’s so unfair to them!
Yeah, I don't know. I'm not sure how unemployment works for federal jobs, but I know for state run unemployment claims, the person could still file and then the conpany (or in this case government) would have to provide evidence of the performance issues.
Amanda and Kelly, I looked into this because I was also curious! There's definitely confusion about this, but from what I found, federal employees terminated for performance reasons (rather than misconduct) typically can still collect unemployment benefits. Here's what I found:
The U.S. Department of Labor distinguishes between misconduct and performance issues in their unemployment guidelines. Poor performance alone is generally not considered disqualifying "misconduct" in most state unemployment systems. You can verify this on a given state's unemployment website - most explicitly state that performance-based terminations don't disqualify you from benefits.
For example, if you check the California Employment Development Department website, they explain that being fired for "inefficiency, poor performance, or inability to perform the job" typically doesn't disqualify someone from benefits. Similar language exists in most state guidelines.
For federal employees specifically, they file for unemployment through their state systems just like other workers, but the benefits are paid by the federal agency.
The Lebanon WSC activity included in this article is implemented by my company. We, along with other plaintiffs, have sued the government about the global stop work order, the terminations, and the fact that they are withholding payment to contractors. As of today, the government has yet to comply with the court order to unfreeze payments and reverse contract terminations. It is 100% lawless. I can’t stress this enough. The government was meant to do a “review of US foreign assistance” but instead just canceled 498 programs (and counting). There was NO REVIEW. They just want to get rid of US foreign assistance. It’s heartbreaking.
Allison, I'm so sorry your company and the critical work you do in Lebanon are caught in this destructive crossfire. Thank you for sharing your firsthand experience.
One of the things I struggle with in regard to Trump is his manner of speaking. The opening quote is a good example. A vague source and a lot of hyperbole. Who is “somebody” or “they” or “nobody”, “my friends” and everything is extreme or absolute, “super”, “nobody”. If only I could go through work like that. I’d be laughed out of the room if I answered questions with such little information.
It bugs me too. He says so many words without providing any actual information and people just eat it up. It drives me crazy. I find reporters rarely ever give him push back when he gives such non answers which bugs me even more.
Yes, the grandiose statements are quite old and frankly meaningless. "The best you've ever seen", "Absolutely brilliant", "The worst in history", and on and on it goes. It's tiresome.
Thank you Sharon for showing receipts. This mornings newsletter shows the factual evidence we need to counter the dis-information being spewed. Sadly, yesterdays Meet The Press with Kristen Welker did not counter the 55 BILLION figure that her guest republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin (Okla.) insisted Musk and his boys had saved. At the end of the interview, he repeated the 55$ Billion number and she then ended the conversation with "thank you for being here." No push back, nothing! I sent her an email to voice my concerns.
Thank you, Sharon! It’s concerning to me that there has been no proof of waste, fraud, or abuse, but only the discontinuation of programs that Trump et al don’t like. Trump’s actions are actually increasing the likelihood for abuse and fraud, including firing the Inspectors General, attempting to fire the Office of Special Counsel, and dismantling watchdog programs. Trump doesn’t seem to have any interest in working with Congress to implement its policies. So what is Congress doing?
I also question where these “savings” will be going. I refuse to cash a $5000 stimulus check that was created by firing federal workers. I’d be interested to see the amount of money spent on these “audits”, the DOGE team and the cost of its mismanagement, compared to its “savings”.
If those checks ever actually do come out (which I have serious doubts will ever happen) I intend to cash it and donate all the money. I’ll drive to the 5 closest national parks and put $1k in each of their donation collection boxes. Or maybe I’ll put it toward sponsoring a refugee family (or give it to organizations that help refugees around the world). If it comes, I’ll make sure it goes right back to helping the people and places that these cuts have hurt.
This has been my question as well. Haven’t heard a word about how these savings will benefit the American people. And in no world will he send out any stimulus to anybody but himself and his crooked cronies.
I believe it’s pretty clear from Trump’s stated policies that these “savings” will go to fund tax cuts for the wealthy. The current tax bill being argued in the Senate is extremely telling.
As has been noted in various places the past few days, none of what Musk has his minions doing is an actual "audit" in any way, shape or form. Combine that with math that doesn't math, and there's just nothing! I wish, as one commenter noted, the lack of audit/lack of purpose was mentioned often and loudly, and that there was more pushback by journalists and elected officials on not only the numbers but the evidence around decision making for these cuts that produce the alleged savings. Big deal - this multi-million dollar contract was cancelled. What was it about the work to be done with that contract that was "waste" or "fraud"? I could crow about reducing my annual household expenditures, too, by cancelling my electric and gas service! There! I've saved $2,000! Oooops, but now I can't function in my house. Musk's reductions in contracts and personnel mean nothing without benefits and consequences explained. But we should know we're never going to get that from a Trump administration hell-bent on destruction of government at any cost.
I keep thinking the same thing! Anyone can cut costs by not paying for things they don’t like, but it will end to their detriment. What Musk is doing is not novel or ingenious. It’s reckless.
I hope everyone who reads this shares it through their own social media account. This is the kind of factual info (that can be easily verified) that Trump supporters need to see. I know many will still disregard it but perhaps the more moderate ones start to question their support.
There are many Trump voters who don’t like how Musk is handling things but agree that something needs to be done. This article has a lot of detail but is missing that many people (Trump voters and others) want to see reduction in government bloat.
There are several articles that share the same info as this Preamble article. For me, this post falls short by not mentioning what has been done historically to reduce waste and also failed to mention any of the potential corruption DOGE has uncovered.
Hey Amy - you said the liberal patriot was great so I clicked that one first. I wanted to share that she immediately lost me because when I fact checked her first claim (using her own link) that USAID was funding a $20MM Sesame Street style show in Iraq, the article she linked to explained that the program was for “direct healthcare outreach” as well as the television program. I’m sharing this because I find these misleading characterizations to be an issue with the trustworthiness of certain outlets and sources. I don’t doubt that there is waste in the government (I don’t think anyone does). I just have a problem with using half truths to promote the important work of making wise spending decisions. In this specific case, there’s an argument to be made that providing healthcare in Iraq is a diplomatic move that contributes positively in the long run to national security. But we (not you and I, but we the people) can’t have that conversation because we’re stuck sifting through misinformation.
Sorry Amy wanted to add one more thing because I think you might appreciate where I’m coming from. In the same way that some on here perceive that the preamble stokes outrage that is unhelpful, I see half truths and mischaracterizations as having a similar effect. If I only skimmed liberal patriots blog I’d probably have a strong negative reaction to $20mm on a puppet show.
The “corruption” you want them to find, is NOT what DOGE is interested in. They ARE the corruption. How about we audit the military? They can’t account for billions of dollars, but nobody ever looks into that and they always get budget increases. How about we fund, staff and improve the IRS? If they had computer systems that weren’t made in 1960, and were staffed properly, we could find billions in revenue owed us. How about we finally put to rest trickle down economics, it only helps the wealthy. Tax the 1% fairly, and guess what, they’re still in the 1%. That’s billions and billions of dollars right there and no hard working middle class people lost their job, SS or Medicare. The people that elon are going after are not the problem, but they convinced you they are and that was their only goal. Get you worrying about the “government abusers” then you won’t noticed that they have done nothing to make your life better.
Yes, Amy and Amber! So many of us want to see waste and bloat curtailed. It's the "how" and the politics that has made this difficult over the decades. (If the Dems even thought of reviewing the military budget in years past, they were labeled anti-American, etc.) And when you claim you are reducing waste and fraud, but 1) fire the inspectors who already have been doing this or 2) move the cost to contractors or the states, there's no credibility in your actions.
In the AP news article they noted that the cuts to federal staff during Clinton's term ended up with more contract staff hired. I'm trying to find more information on that, but it's an interesting statement. I wonder if these job cuts will end up with more contract staff as well. Which in the end would reduce the savings DOGE has said it's found.
The Liberal Patriot article also brought up a great point that I'd like to see someone discuss more, which is auditing already exists. There are trade offs to the slow auditing process we have versus DOGE. And I think we're seeing some of them play out in real time with important jobs being cut before realizing they are necessary. There is a reason many things in government have worked slowly and that's because we do expect accounting from agencies. And those reports and explanations take time. How do you quicken the pace of the current auditing process? And then how do you also not have the auditing process impede the work of government once it starts. There has to be a better way than what DOGE is doing. In the end I don't think DOGE will be remembered fondly or have a net positive. But I guess time will tell how Musk and his 'work' is remembered.
Once upon a time I really related to the impulse to “burn it all down.” I get why some people feel that way. I just think it’s important to remember that if this approach is used to “cut waste” and achieve the goals of the Republican Party, there’s no reason why the pendulum won’t swing back the other way with the same force. This is one of those times we have to remind ourselves that the ends don’t justify the means. Because these same means will likely be picked up by the next leader, who may be emboldened by the chaos to stage a coup, whose revolution may include more direct violence, who may use a metaphorical machete to enact *their* party’s will on the government. It’s not enough for republicans to say they don’t prefer the way Elon is going about things. This isn’t a sandwich making contest. It’s the future of governance in our nation.
I agree that both what you use against others will be used against you and the point of DOGE isn't actually to audit. That's why everything that comes from them is chaotic.
You and I both know, and so does MAGA, that the pendulum will never swing back the other way because as a whole, Democrats believe in facts, the value of democracy, the importance of the Constitution and separation of powers and in the government of the United States as a force for good in the world. When the Dems regain power they will attempt to govern as the founders intended and will not go near the democracy-destroying weapons amassed by MAGA. And because of this they will be fighting with one hand tied behind their backs, always at a disadvantage, unless more Americans wake up reality.
The Democratic Party as it stands may not. But an extreme left contingent might not be so reticent to use undemocratic means. Extremism can arise anywhere there is enough fear and uncertainty.
Yeah I think it's dangerous to assume there will never be extremes on either side. It's important to recognize these patterns so if we see them in the people we support we can step up and say no in that situation as well.
Yes I am just still unclear what the facts are about that line in the interview. Did the loss of those FTE result in more contract staff? How many, etc. I haven't had enough time to really look into it though!
That is one of the most frustrating parts of DOGE cutting federal employees. They will most likely be backfield with contractors at a much higher cost. DOD is notorious for cutting staff and hiring tons of defense contractors.
I think it’s a safe assumption that literally no one in all of America wants fraud or corruption in our government finances and that we want something to be done about it. Stipulating that articles like this must include that caveat creates a “both sides” narrative that undercuts the concern expressed. It’s okay to simply say “Elon Musk is doing this wrong,” without having to say but but but of course fraud is bad!
I keep thinking about this too Ashley. I’m struggling to understand the origins of the sentiment that we *must* “say something nice” (for lack of better terminology) about the person/organization/philosophy we are critiquing in order for it to be a valid commentary. Where did this come from? I keep harping about universal standards of morality for this reason. Neutrality is not a virtue. Truthfulness is. Integrity is. Also, I’m a huge proponent of contextualization, but there are limits. We have to be satisfied with context that is relevant and meaningful, otherwise we need to return to the dawn of time in order to be “fair,” because how else will we know where it ends?
I don’t know that anyone has to be nice to illustrate both sides of the story. I think that context and framing of a perspective is impactful. If done well, you won’t know where the author stands politically.
I will use this opportunity to clarify what I’m saying here Amy, which is that the commitment to honesty, wisdom and democratic principles is not a partisan stance. It does not belong to either the right or the left. It should in no way indicate someone’s “politics” to call out dishonesty, poor judgment or anti democratic behavior. I say “should” because that’s not always the case. But I think both republicans and democrats and everyone else who calls America home should feel compelled to take ownership of the ideological stance that says “Elon’s actions are wrong.” Full stop. No qualifiers needed.
Anything criticizing Trump or his allies on here is quickly labeled as "biased" or "partisan". It feels like the implication is that the rest of us are blindly following anything Sharon writes here and are not getting the whole picture just because we read or liked this article.
With the speed they are operating at, there is no way they can understand the intricacies of each department enough to clearly label something as fraud. It is easy to assume something you don't understand is fraud, but much harder to prove that.
Everyone can agree that the government can and should run more efficiently. But it is disingenuous for Trump/Musk/Republicans to be making that claim given their actions. Musk saving billions is literally pennies considered to the $4 trillion budget bill Trump and Republicans are pushing for in Congress. To put those numbers in perspective:
The biggest government bloat is in privatization of government functions. That is also where to find the waste fraud and abuse. Billions of tax dollars every year are funneled into the profits of private companies. Those dollars provide no benefit to the general public, only to the owners and stockholders of the companies. Some of the largest government contractor CEO have salaries in the 10s of millions if dollars and the government is their only or the majority source of business. Space X is one of them.
Lobbyists work to keep those contracts renewing.
But looking at a line item in an appropriation or a contract for something approved by congress and canceling without a thorough analysis is not rooting out waste, abuse and fraud. And even if it's an expenditure you don't agree with or fully understand doesn't make it wasteful.
Do you really think the subscribers here need to be told by Sharon that people in general have an aversion to government waste? She was doing a fact check on false and misleading claims made by the richest, most powerful person in the world who is wreaking havoc and upending millions of lives. She is not, by definition, doing a fact check on “potential corruption,” of which I’m sure the government and life in general are full of. Do you think no one reads the links you post to support your opinions? The first one details a multi-year, bipartisan, painstaking whole-of-government effort to try to identify waste and inefficiencies. That is the exact opposite of what is going on with Musk and thus has no relevance. The second link details even more lies and misinformation put out by Musk concerning his slash and burn activities. I guess you listed that because you were displeased that Sharon’s analysis wasn’t complete in that she could not fit all of Musk’s lies into one fact check. The third link is a very poorly researched culture war screed taking unverified talking points from Fox News and Rand Paul, assuming their complete validity and then turning all of that into an indictment of Congress for not investigating every penny of allocated funds disbursed by every federal agency. What an absurd position. Congress would get even less work done if it were continually in the weeds chasing pennies instead of relying on professionals in government, watchdog offices and inspectors general to audit and track spending. The last link is probably the worst one. Another opinion screed, of course, this one basically saying who cares if Musk is lying about his claims if we all get checks in the mail from the phantom waste and fraud he finds? Just a great recipe for the health of the nation, all this: upend millions of lives and our democracy, lie and misinform regarding supposed waste and fraud, send people checks based on the lies, heat up inflation and then go ahead and extend the tax cuts that were never paid for years ago and put us all even trillions more into debt. And top it all off by, for the first time in American history, voting in the United Nations with Russia, North Korea and Iran and against our own allies. Making America great again it ain’t.
Because the links you provide are often at odds with the statements you make, are poorly researched, are partisan opinion screeds and/or very sparse on facts.
I don’t know why you take the time and effort to reply to my comments. What value are you adding? I’m not seeing a different perspective or even being challenged. The only thing I can see is that you enjoy making me look like a fool. I’m going to give you some grace and believe that you aren’t this way in real life. I’m not perfect or even trying to be and make mistakes.
I thought it would be helpful to provide some links I had read that helped me form my opinion. Not everyone has to like/agree with them.
I’m so tired of the victimization complex on the right. For the umpteenth time, I respond to comments for the benefit of other readers, not you. I make the effort and take the time to research and analyze links and comments because I believe unchecked and unchallenged misinformation, disinformation and unsupported opinions are what got us where we are today. Those links may have helped you form your opinion but they in no way supported your assertions.
Thanks Sharon - this looks like a mess to try to sort through. I am a little confused about the outlaid vs obligated amounts. The bar graphs make it look like the obligated amount is the total amount they have to pay including what they have already paid, not in addition? Is that not correct?
I have the same question, specifically on the contract that they have already paid $18 million on. Per that graph, the $17 million is included in that, not in addition to.
The obligated amount is kind of like a “two drink minimum” if you were going to a show (silly example, but stick with me). You have the full amount that the contract could go up to, the amount that the government has approved so far, and then the amount that the government is legally required to spend within that contract agreement (obligated amount). The final amount that is spent on the contract must be between the obligated amount and the government approved amount, which could go all the way up to the limit (but doesn’t have to). Outlaid amount just shows what’s been spent so far, so if it’s below the obligated amount we must pay out the difference even if the contract is cancelled.
Yes, and even if the contract is canceled, which also requires receipts, the funds are still there to be spent for the purpose intended until they expire. There is no savings until the funds are canceled by congress or they expire. Most funds and contracts span many years.
That is correct. For the person asking about the $18 million one, yes, it means that we've actually already paid off the obligated amount. The government owes $0 on it, but the contract leaves open additional work, which is probably under a contracted rate and maximum spend.
Thanks Rachel - there was an earlier version that described the amounts differently. Looks like Sharon has updated it since originally posting this morning to correct this!
Thank you Sharon, for this thorough accounting. I think it's so important for us to reframe DOGE and every single tagline about "government waste". I keep seeing Dems opening with 'of course WE want to get rid of government waste, fraud, bloat too, but this just isn't the way to do it.' Which of course is true, but it undermines the primary argument every time - that DOGE and Elon have nothing to do with waste. Or fraud. Or government bloat. That's all just smoke and mirrors - the tagline for social media. So of course the math isn't math-ing.
DOGE and Elon's purpose is to take down the established systems of government, to get rid of as many civil servants as possible and to replace them with loyalists. To break everything from the inside so that it can't function, even if reinstated. The architects of Project 2025 were skeptical that this could be done legally, so instead the administration decided to do a smash and grab. It's illegal, and infuriating, and all done to support a coup. Call it what it is. As loudly and as often as possible.
The damage is already done, and continues every single day. The destruction done to this point would take months to repair, and more is coming our way. So our messaging needs to change from 'well, we care about fraud too...' to 'the administration is lying to you and stealing from the American people. An unelected, unsupervised billionaire who doesn't care about you or your family is using your belief to take down the government. This is a coup. An actual coup happening in broad daylight, and this administration will tell you anything to get you to believe differently. Don't fall for it again.'
Will this change minds? Not all of them or most of them - the facts in this Preamble will help to counteract the misinformation, though. And when the cards fall, I have to believe every single time we tell the truth, we share the facts, and we scream what is actually happening creates enough friction for light to get in, just a little bit.
Sharon you and your team are doing the work the mainstream media should be doing. (But keep it up.) This is why your site is on the top of many lists advising people where to get honest in-depth news. I look forward every day to what you have to say; I know I will be enlightened. Thank you.
As a math nerd, I appreciate this article so much. If DOGE is going to have a website with "receipts" do we need a Governerd site that tracks the real numbers with actual receipts, like a watchDOGE site? 😂 One that goes line by line and debunks their numbers.
How. How are they (DOGE) getting away with this? This information is clearly inaccurate and not true. Can anything be done to stop this? I’m at a loss. I wrote to my Representative about my concerns about Musk and DOGE and his response was less than encouraging and I think he even lied about a few things. I’m tired of my government lying through its teeth.
I am lucky enough to have sane Democrats as my representatives in House and Senate at the federal level. Still, I know they are flailing and don't quite know how to handle this mess. But at least I know they are trying and respond to questions and concerns thruthfully. I guess I would keep contacting my representative if I felt they were waffling on the seriousness of this and/or lying. Let them know that you expect to hear facts from them and that you expect them to adhere to the oath they took to uphold the Constitution and their duties as a check-and-balance to power - and you don't feel they are meeting your expectations. (I've done this with my state Rep and Senator [who happen to be Republicans] when their responses have been less than satisfactory regarding some local issues. I don't think I will change their minds, necessarily, but I want them to know I'm aware of facts and that they should not beleive they have a "mandate" in their districts.)
My senators didn’t even respond to my inquiries, so I guess I’m glad at least one person took the time to reply, even if it wasn’t what I wanted to hear.
That the general math and understanding of govt. contracts is wrong to me is amusing - it's so easy to see they don't know what they're doing and don't care enough to even make it look like they do (we all know they have no problem lying, so why not do it better?). But even better is I don't believe they've uncovered a single instance of actual fraud, waste, or abuse. If they had it's alllll they would talk about.
One of the key things that gives me hope that democracy will endure is the general carelessness and lack of attention to detail that people like Trump, Musk, and many of the lesser qualified people around him have. (There are less careless people around him that I consider a true danger.) They're not being clever, or cunning - they're wrecking balls with the power to cause real harm - but at the end of the day Trump doesn't have much depth. I have to hope that the growing resistance will succeed if we keep pushing!
The meticulous analysis debunking DOGE's $55 billion savings claim illustrates a critical point, but it doesn’t take into account the hidden costs of all the damage being done. While it is such important work to show how DOGE's math fails even on its own terms - from phantom savings on contracts that weren't actually canceled to inflated figures that exceed the maximum possible savings - the real numbers are even worse than the $7 billion figure that Sharon’s thorough analysis has already reduced it to. Possibly less than zero would be accurate?
Let's do some basic math: Start with that $7 billion in supposed savings. Now subtract the immediate, quantifiable costs of this reckless approach:
- The administrative costs of processing mass terminations
- The legal expenses from inevitable wrongful termination suits
- The higher future costs of restarting critical programs
- The expense of rebuilding lost institutional knowledge
- The cost of repeating work that was abandoned mid-process
These alone would eliminate most if not all of the claimed savings. But the true scope of waste and damage runs far deeper: There is the economic cost of the lives lost, livelihoods ruined, and preventable diseases spread. (BTW I'm ignoring the enormous moral value of these lives and communities for the sake of staying on topic of the national budget, obviously value doesn't only come in the form of $.)
In "Veterans Left Behind, Millions Spent on Confederate Names, and Europe on Edge," Sharon revealed how DOGE's attack on the VA exemplifies this destructive approach. They're firing medical personnel who had outstanding performance reviews, after investing years in their specialized training, security clearances, and institutional knowledge. The VA claims these layoffs will save $98 million annually, but they're making these cuts while suffering from major staffing shortages - meaning they'll eventually need to spend even more to recruit and train replacements. Meanwhile, they're simultaneously spending $62.5 million to rename military bases, only to spend that amount again to rename them back.
I was just listening to the “Science Vs” podcast, a research-backed science show, which has documented an even more devastating pattern across other agencies in their recent episode “The War on Science". It uncovered thousands of scientists being terminated at the CDC and NIH, with research worth hundreds of millions being abandoned mid-stream. The University of Washington's medical school stands to lose $90-110 million in funding, much of it for clinical trials that are nearly complete. At St. Jude's Children's Research Hospital, cuts to NIH funding would cost nearly $40 million annually, with their cancer center director warning bluntly: "More children will die." The podcast identified over 30 frozen studies where volunteers were already under researcher care, including malaria treatment trials for children under 5 in Mozambique, tuberculosis treatment studies in Peru and South Africa, and critical HIV vaccine research.
The cascading institutional damage is equally severe. Science Vs revealed how scientists are desperately trying to preserve terabytes of vital health data before it disappears, including critical information that helped control the recent monkeypox outbreak. They documented how researchers knew exactly which communities were most at risk because they had detailed data on infection patterns - data that's now being fragmented or deleted under Trump’s directives. And why is this data being deleted? Somebody decided that keywords like “systemic” or “women” are too woke and any work using it should be destroyed.
The dismantling of USAID shows how these impacts extend far beyond our borders. Research participants around the world have been suddenly abandoned, destroying trust in American institutions and partnerships that took decades to build. People on experimental treatments have been left without care, and promising research into preventing future pandemics has been halted mid-stream.
Having unqualified DOGE staff - who lack both subject matter expertise and basic understanding of government operations - making these sweeping decisions compounds the damage. The combination of mathematical errors in their claimed savings and complete disregard for true costs reveals this as political theater.
This human toll has profound economic consequences too. Each preventable death represents not just a moral tragedy but the loss of economic productivity, tax revenue, and societal contribution. The CDC estimates that preventing just one premature death from cancer creates approximately $1 million in economic value. Pandemic prevention yields even greater returns - with studies showing that every dollar invested in public health preparedness saves $13-15 in avoided costs. Maintaining vaccination programs prevents billions in healthcare costs and economic disruption.
By that measure, DOGE's actions represent not savings, but an unprecedented destruction of public value and capability that will take years, if not decades, to rebuild - if we can rebuild it at all.
Not to mention the distrust anyone with skill and talent might have long term about being employed by or contacting with the federal government. We will lose out on entire generations of smart people, who used to do the work at less than market rate for the benefit of stability and being able to work on projects that are designed to help people without a profit motive in mind. This is designed to destroy the entire structure of the government, such that *if* important work gets done, it goes to for profit entities. The public will no longer have any interest or right to that work.
Yes! I hear "we're saving so much money" but then trump goes to the Superbowl? They're saving nothing, lying about it and then participating in things that cost tax payer money!
I listened to an interesting podcast from NYT's The Daily with Ruben Gallego about why most people don't care about DT going to the Super Bowl and the money spent. It had a lot of other brain tingles in there as well. It's just one person's opinion but he won in a district that DT won as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85qWjka-Bmg
Another cost of firing people is them claiming unemployment benefits.
That's a really good point, Kelly - I hadn't even considered the unemployment benefits angle!
From what I understand, federal unemployment insurance works a bit differently than the private sector. Federal agencies don't pay unemployment taxes like private employers do. Instead, when a federal employee is laid off and successfully claims unemployment, the benefits are paid by the specific federal agency that employed them. Those payments come directly from each agency's budget, which means they're additional costs that would offset any supposed "savings" from the layoffs.
This is important because an agency like the VA that claims to be saving $98 million by cutting staff would actually save considerably less once you factor in the unemployment benefits they'll have to pay. Depending on the state where the employee files and their salary level, this could cost thousands per terminated employee.
I believe federal employees generally qualify for unemployment benefits when terminated through no fault of their own (like these DOGE layoffs). Even terminations that cite performance issues rather than misconduct would typically still qualify for unemployment benefits - poor performance alone usually isn't disqualifying. They typically wouldn't qualify only if they were fired for serious misconduct or if they quit voluntarily.
It's obviously a good thing that unemployment coverage exists for these DOGE casualties - people shouldn't lose their livelihoods because of political decisions. But as always, there's a deep irony here: taxpayers are now funding unemployment benefits for workers removed from necessary positions that will eventually need to be refilled... paid for by those same taxpayers. So we're essentially paying twice - once for the person not to work, and again to recruit and train their eventual replacement. Efficiency indeed! 🥲
Geez, that's even worse that it comes directly out of their budget!
Kelly, I’ve seen conflicting reports on if they’re allowed to claim unemployment, I’ve seen some say they can’t because they were terminated for performance reasons. I haven’t found anything to say one way or another. Have you found anything that shows they do? I am hoping they do bc it’s so unfair to them!
Yeah, I don't know. I'm not sure how unemployment works for federal jobs, but I know for state run unemployment claims, the person could still file and then the conpany (or in this case government) would have to provide evidence of the performance issues.
Amanda and Kelly, I looked into this because I was also curious! There's definitely confusion about this, but from what I found, federal employees terminated for performance reasons (rather than misconduct) typically can still collect unemployment benefits. Here's what I found:
The U.S. Department of Labor distinguishes between misconduct and performance issues in their unemployment guidelines. Poor performance alone is generally not considered disqualifying "misconduct" in most state unemployment systems. You can verify this on a given state's unemployment website - most explicitly state that performance-based terminations don't disqualify you from benefits.
For example, if you check the California Employment Development Department website, they explain that being fired for "inefficiency, poor performance, or inability to perform the job" typically doesn't disqualify someone from benefits. Similar language exists in most state guidelines.
For federal employees specifically, they file for unemployment through their state systems just like other workers, but the benefits are paid by the federal agency.
https://edd.ca.gov/en/uibdg/Misconduct_MC_300/
Timothy, thanks so much for the info!
"Political theater" - ding ding ding!
Thanks so much for this post. Totally agree.
The Lebanon WSC activity included in this article is implemented by my company. We, along with other plaintiffs, have sued the government about the global stop work order, the terminations, and the fact that they are withholding payment to contractors. As of today, the government has yet to comply with the court order to unfreeze payments and reverse contract terminations. It is 100% lawless. I can’t stress this enough. The government was meant to do a “review of US foreign assistance” but instead just canceled 498 programs (and counting). There was NO REVIEW. They just want to get rid of US foreign assistance. It’s heartbreaking.
Allison, I'm so sorry your company and the critical work you do in Lebanon are caught in this destructive crossfire. Thank you for sharing your firsthand experience.
One of the things I struggle with in regard to Trump is his manner of speaking. The opening quote is a good example. A vague source and a lot of hyperbole. Who is “somebody” or “they” or “nobody”, “my friends” and everything is extreme or absolute, “super”, “nobody”. If only I could go through work like that. I’d be laughed out of the room if I answered questions with such little information.
It bugs me too. He says so many words without providing any actual information and people just eat it up. It drives me crazy. I find reporters rarely ever give him push back when he gives such non answers which bugs me even more.
We call that "Word Salad"
Yes, the grandiose statements are quite old and frankly meaningless. "The best you've ever seen", "Absolutely brilliant", "The worst in history", and on and on it goes. It's tiresome.
Thank you Sharon for showing receipts. This mornings newsletter shows the factual evidence we need to counter the dis-information being spewed. Sadly, yesterdays Meet The Press with Kristen Welker did not counter the 55 BILLION figure that her guest republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin (Okla.) insisted Musk and his boys had saved. At the end of the interview, he repeated the 55$ Billion number and she then ended the conversation with "thank you for being here." No push back, nothing! I sent her an email to voice my concerns.
Thank you, Sharon! It’s concerning to me that there has been no proof of waste, fraud, or abuse, but only the discontinuation of programs that Trump et al don’t like. Trump’s actions are actually increasing the likelihood for abuse and fraud, including firing the Inspectors General, attempting to fire the Office of Special Counsel, and dismantling watchdog programs. Trump doesn’t seem to have any interest in working with Congress to implement its policies. So what is Congress doing?
I also question where these “savings” will be going. I refuse to cash a $5000 stimulus check that was created by firing federal workers. I’d be interested to see the amount of money spent on these “audits”, the DOGE team and the cost of its mismanagement, compared to its “savings”.
If those checks ever actually do come out (which I have serious doubts will ever happen) I intend to cash it and donate all the money. I’ll drive to the 5 closest national parks and put $1k in each of their donation collection boxes. Or maybe I’ll put it toward sponsoring a refugee family (or give it to organizations that help refugees around the world). If it comes, I’ll make sure it goes right back to helping the people and places that these cuts have hurt.
This has been my question as well. Haven’t heard a word about how these savings will benefit the American people. And in no world will he send out any stimulus to anybody but himself and his crooked cronies.
I believe it’s pretty clear from Trump’s stated policies that these “savings” will go to fund tax cuts for the wealthy. The current tax bill being argued in the Senate is extremely telling.
As has been noted in various places the past few days, none of what Musk has his minions doing is an actual "audit" in any way, shape or form. Combine that with math that doesn't math, and there's just nothing! I wish, as one commenter noted, the lack of audit/lack of purpose was mentioned often and loudly, and that there was more pushback by journalists and elected officials on not only the numbers but the evidence around decision making for these cuts that produce the alleged savings. Big deal - this multi-million dollar contract was cancelled. What was it about the work to be done with that contract that was "waste" or "fraud"? I could crow about reducing my annual household expenditures, too, by cancelling my electric and gas service! There! I've saved $2,000! Oooops, but now I can't function in my house. Musk's reductions in contracts and personnel mean nothing without benefits and consequences explained. But we should know we're never going to get that from a Trump administration hell-bent on destruction of government at any cost.
I keep thinking the same thing! Anyone can cut costs by not paying for things they don’t like, but it will end to their detriment. What Musk is doing is not novel or ingenious. It’s reckless.
Thank you for these real receipts. I truly appreciate the work you do to give us the facts.
Sharon, you are doing such important work. I just became a paying subscriber so I can do more to support you. Thank you for not being deterred!
I hope everyone who reads this shares it through their own social media account. This is the kind of factual info (that can be easily verified) that Trump supporters need to see. I know many will still disregard it but perhaps the more moderate ones start to question their support.
There are many Trump voters who don’t like how Musk is handling things but agree that something needs to be done. This article has a lot of detail but is missing that many people (Trump voters and others) want to see reduction in government bloat.
There are several articles that share the same info as this Preamble article. For me, this post falls short by not mentioning what has been done historically to reduce waste and also failed to mention any of the potential corruption DOGE has uncovered.
Sources (which are critical of DOGE by the way):
https://apnews.com/article/trump-musk-doge-clinton-reinventing-government-gore-a95795eb75cacc03734ef0065c1b0a6d
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doge-wall-of-receipts-shows-errors-tallying-billions-in-savings/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab4i
This is one is great. This substack has a very balanced approach when providing opinion pieces - supported by facts.
https://www.liberalpatriot.com/p/congress-has-only-itself-to-blame?utm_source=post-banner&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=posts-open-in-app&triedRedirect=true
Opinion article supporting DOGE
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/5155741-elon-musk-doge-dividend-trump-gop/amp/
Hey Amy - you said the liberal patriot was great so I clicked that one first. I wanted to share that she immediately lost me because when I fact checked her first claim (using her own link) that USAID was funding a $20MM Sesame Street style show in Iraq, the article she linked to explained that the program was for “direct healthcare outreach” as well as the television program. I’m sharing this because I find these misleading characterizations to be an issue with the trustworthiness of certain outlets and sources. I don’t doubt that there is waste in the government (I don’t think anyone does). I just have a problem with using half truths to promote the important work of making wise spending decisions. In this specific case, there’s an argument to be made that providing healthcare in Iraq is a diplomatic move that contributes positively in the long run to national security. But we (not you and I, but we the people) can’t have that conversation because we’re stuck sifting through misinformation.
Sorry Amy wanted to add one more thing because I think you might appreciate where I’m coming from. In the same way that some on here perceive that the preamble stokes outrage that is unhelpful, I see half truths and mischaracterizations as having a similar effect. If I only skimmed liberal patriots blog I’d probably have a strong negative reaction to $20mm on a puppet show.
Thanks Summer for sharing. I agree- it’s important to have a variety of sources to form our opinions.
The “corruption” you want them to find, is NOT what DOGE is interested in. They ARE the corruption. How about we audit the military? They can’t account for billions of dollars, but nobody ever looks into that and they always get budget increases. How about we fund, staff and improve the IRS? If they had computer systems that weren’t made in 1960, and were staffed properly, we could find billions in revenue owed us. How about we finally put to rest trickle down economics, it only helps the wealthy. Tax the 1% fairly, and guess what, they’re still in the 1%. That’s billions and billions of dollars right there and no hard working middle class people lost their job, SS or Medicare. The people that elon are going after are not the problem, but they convinced you they are and that was their only goal. Get you worrying about the “government abusers” then you won’t noticed that they have done nothing to make your life better.
Yes, Amy and Amber! So many of us want to see waste and bloat curtailed. It's the "how" and the politics that has made this difficult over the decades. (If the Dems even thought of reviewing the military budget in years past, they were labeled anti-American, etc.) And when you claim you are reducing waste and fraud, but 1) fire the inspectors who already have been doing this or 2) move the cost to contractors or the states, there's no credibility in your actions.
In the AP news article they noted that the cuts to federal staff during Clinton's term ended up with more contract staff hired. I'm trying to find more information on that, but it's an interesting statement. I wonder if these job cuts will end up with more contract staff as well. Which in the end would reduce the savings DOGE has said it's found.
The Liberal Patriot article also brought up a great point that I'd like to see someone discuss more, which is auditing already exists. There are trade offs to the slow auditing process we have versus DOGE. And I think we're seeing some of them play out in real time with important jobs being cut before realizing they are necessary. There is a reason many things in government have worked slowly and that's because we do expect accounting from agencies. And those reports and explanations take time. How do you quicken the pace of the current auditing process? And then how do you also not have the auditing process impede the work of government once it starts. There has to be a better way than what DOGE is doing. In the end I don't think DOGE will be remembered fondly or have a net positive. But I guess time will tell how Musk and his 'work' is remembered.
Once upon a time I really related to the impulse to “burn it all down.” I get why some people feel that way. I just think it’s important to remember that if this approach is used to “cut waste” and achieve the goals of the Republican Party, there’s no reason why the pendulum won’t swing back the other way with the same force. This is one of those times we have to remind ourselves that the ends don’t justify the means. Because these same means will likely be picked up by the next leader, who may be emboldened by the chaos to stage a coup, whose revolution may include more direct violence, who may use a metaphorical machete to enact *their* party’s will on the government. It’s not enough for republicans to say they don’t prefer the way Elon is going about things. This isn’t a sandwich making contest. It’s the future of governance in our nation.
I agree that both what you use against others will be used against you and the point of DOGE isn't actually to audit. That's why everything that comes from them is chaotic.
No question about it.
You and I both know, and so does MAGA, that the pendulum will never swing back the other way because as a whole, Democrats believe in facts, the value of democracy, the importance of the Constitution and separation of powers and in the government of the United States as a force for good in the world. When the Dems regain power they will attempt to govern as the founders intended and will not go near the democracy-destroying weapons amassed by MAGA. And because of this they will be fighting with one hand tied behind their backs, always at a disadvantage, unless more Americans wake up reality.
The Democratic Party as it stands may not. But an extreme left contingent might not be so reticent to use undemocratic means. Extremism can arise anywhere there is enough fear and uncertainty.
Yeah I think it's dangerous to assume there will never be extremes on either side. It's important to recognize these patterns so if we see them in the people we support we can step up and say no in that situation as well.
Contract staff inevitably costs much much more than permanent FTEs. And there are a lot more benefits to permanent FTEs than contract works as well.
Yes I am just still unclear what the facts are about that line in the interview. Did the loss of those FTE result in more contract staff? How many, etc. I haven't had enough time to really look into it though!
That is one of the most frustrating parts of DOGE cutting federal employees. They will most likely be backfield with contractors at a much higher cost. DOD is notorious for cutting staff and hiring tons of defense contractors.
I agree Amber. DOGE won’t be remembered in a positive light because of the disrupting approach.
I think it’s a safe assumption that literally no one in all of America wants fraud or corruption in our government finances and that we want something to be done about it. Stipulating that articles like this must include that caveat creates a “both sides” narrative that undercuts the concern expressed. It’s okay to simply say “Elon Musk is doing this wrong,” without having to say but but but of course fraud is bad!
I keep thinking about this too Ashley. I’m struggling to understand the origins of the sentiment that we *must* “say something nice” (for lack of better terminology) about the person/organization/philosophy we are critiquing in order for it to be a valid commentary. Where did this come from? I keep harping about universal standards of morality for this reason. Neutrality is not a virtue. Truthfulness is. Integrity is. Also, I’m a huge proponent of contextualization, but there are limits. We have to be satisfied with context that is relevant and meaningful, otherwise we need to return to the dawn of time in order to be “fair,” because how else will we know where it ends?
I don’t know that anyone has to be nice to illustrate both sides of the story. I think that context and framing of a perspective is impactful. If done well, you won’t know where the author stands politically.
I will use this opportunity to clarify what I’m saying here Amy, which is that the commitment to honesty, wisdom and democratic principles is not a partisan stance. It does not belong to either the right or the left. It should in no way indicate someone’s “politics” to call out dishonesty, poor judgment or anti democratic behavior. I say “should” because that’s not always the case. But I think both republicans and democrats and everyone else who calls America home should feel compelled to take ownership of the ideological stance that says “Elon’s actions are wrong.” Full stop. No qualifiers needed.
Well said, Summer.
Anything criticizing Trump or his allies on here is quickly labeled as "biased" or "partisan". It feels like the implication is that the rest of us are blindly following anything Sharon writes here and are not getting the whole picture just because we read or liked this article.
I agree Summer. Thank you for clarifying.
Yeah, being nice about it wasn’t the best phrasing.
Thanks for sharing your opinion, Ashley.
With the speed they are operating at, there is no way they can understand the intricacies of each department enough to clearly label something as fraud. It is easy to assume something you don't understand is fraud, but much harder to prove that.
“Everything is a conspiracy when you don’t know how anything works”
Agree Kelly. Not an easy task but needs to be more thoughtful.
Everyone can agree that the government can and should run more efficiently. But it is disingenuous for Trump/Musk/Republicans to be making that claim given their actions. Musk saving billions is literally pennies considered to the $4 trillion budget bill Trump and Republicans are pushing for in Congress. To put those numbers in perspective:
A million seconds is 12 days.
A billion seconds is 31 years.
A trillion seconds is 31,688 years.
The biggest government bloat is in privatization of government functions. That is also where to find the waste fraud and abuse. Billions of tax dollars every year are funneled into the profits of private companies. Those dollars provide no benefit to the general public, only to the owners and stockholders of the companies. Some of the largest government contractor CEO have salaries in the 10s of millions if dollars and the government is their only or the majority source of business. Space X is one of them.
Lobbyists work to keep those contracts renewing.
But looking at a line item in an appropriation or a contract for something approved by congress and canceling without a thorough analysis is not rooting out waste, abuse and fraud. And even if it's an expenditure you don't agree with or fully understand doesn't make it wasteful.
Do you really think the subscribers here need to be told by Sharon that people in general have an aversion to government waste? She was doing a fact check on false and misleading claims made by the richest, most powerful person in the world who is wreaking havoc and upending millions of lives. She is not, by definition, doing a fact check on “potential corruption,” of which I’m sure the government and life in general are full of. Do you think no one reads the links you post to support your opinions? The first one details a multi-year, bipartisan, painstaking whole-of-government effort to try to identify waste and inefficiencies. That is the exact opposite of what is going on with Musk and thus has no relevance. The second link details even more lies and misinformation put out by Musk concerning his slash and burn activities. I guess you listed that because you were displeased that Sharon’s analysis wasn’t complete in that she could not fit all of Musk’s lies into one fact check. The third link is a very poorly researched culture war screed taking unverified talking points from Fox News and Rand Paul, assuming their complete validity and then turning all of that into an indictment of Congress for not investigating every penny of allocated funds disbursed by every federal agency. What an absurd position. Congress would get even less work done if it were continually in the weeds chasing pennies instead of relying on professionals in government, watchdog offices and inspectors general to audit and track spending. The last link is probably the worst one. Another opinion screed, of course, this one basically saying who cares if Musk is lying about his claims if we all get checks in the mail from the phantom waste and fraud he finds? Just a great recipe for the health of the nation, all this: upend millions of lives and our democracy, lie and misinform regarding supposed waste and fraud, send people checks based on the lies, heat up inflation and then go ahead and extend the tax cuts that were never paid for years ago and put us all even trillions more into debt. And top it all off by, for the first time in American history, voting in the United Nations with Russia, North Korea and Iran and against our own allies. Making America great again it ain’t.
Kate you are obviously angry and love to prove me wrong. You always want me to provide sources and when I do, they aren’t good enough for you.
Because the links you provide are often at odds with the statements you make, are poorly researched, are partisan opinion screeds and/or very sparse on facts.
I don’t know why you take the time and effort to reply to my comments. What value are you adding? I’m not seeing a different perspective or even being challenged. The only thing I can see is that you enjoy making me look like a fool. I’m going to give you some grace and believe that you aren’t this way in real life. I’m not perfect or even trying to be and make mistakes.
I thought it would be helpful to provide some links I had read that helped me form my opinion. Not everyone has to like/agree with them.
I’m so tired of the victimization complex on the right. For the umpteenth time, I respond to comments for the benefit of other readers, not you. I make the effort and take the time to research and analyze links and comments because I believe unchecked and unchallenged misinformation, disinformation and unsupported opinions are what got us where we are today. Those links may have helped you form your opinion but they in no way supported your assertions.
Wouldn’t it be great if Fox News or News Max would share this information. (most likely not but it doesn’t hurt to dream)
Thanks Sharon - this looks like a mess to try to sort through. I am a little confused about the outlaid vs obligated amounts. The bar graphs make it look like the obligated amount is the total amount they have to pay including what they have already paid, not in addition? Is that not correct?
I have the same question, specifically on the contract that they have already paid $18 million on. Per that graph, the $17 million is included in that, not in addition to.
I just updated to make it clearer! Hopefully that helps.
Thank you! 🫶🏼
Yes same! These graphs don’t align with the narrative explanation.
The obligated amount is kind of like a “two drink minimum” if you were going to a show (silly example, but stick with me). You have the full amount that the contract could go up to, the amount that the government has approved so far, and then the amount that the government is legally required to spend within that contract agreement (obligated amount). The final amount that is spent on the contract must be between the obligated amount and the government approved amount, which could go all the way up to the limit (but doesn’t have to). Outlaid amount just shows what’s been spent so far, so if it’s below the obligated amount we must pay out the difference even if the contract is cancelled.
Thanks Jenna. It looks like Sharon has updated it since it was originally posted to reflect this as well!
Ooooh that makes sense! I didn’t read it until about a half hour ago… sorry if I gave an explanation you didn’t need 😂
Oh no need to apologize! I'm sure my original comment doesn't make sense with the updated version haha
Yes, and even if the contract is canceled, which also requires receipts, the funds are still there to be spent for the purpose intended until they expire. There is no savings until the funds are canceled by congress or they expire. Most funds and contracts span many years.
That is correct. For the person asking about the $18 million one, yes, it means that we've actually already paid off the obligated amount. The government owes $0 on it, but the contract leaves open additional work, which is probably under a contracted rate and maximum spend.
Thanks Rachel - there was an earlier version that described the amounts differently. Looks like Sharon has updated it since originally posting this morning to correct this!
Thank you Sharon, for this thorough accounting. I think it's so important for us to reframe DOGE and every single tagline about "government waste". I keep seeing Dems opening with 'of course WE want to get rid of government waste, fraud, bloat too, but this just isn't the way to do it.' Which of course is true, but it undermines the primary argument every time - that DOGE and Elon have nothing to do with waste. Or fraud. Or government bloat. That's all just smoke and mirrors - the tagline for social media. So of course the math isn't math-ing.
DOGE and Elon's purpose is to take down the established systems of government, to get rid of as many civil servants as possible and to replace them with loyalists. To break everything from the inside so that it can't function, even if reinstated. The architects of Project 2025 were skeptical that this could be done legally, so instead the administration decided to do a smash and grab. It's illegal, and infuriating, and all done to support a coup. Call it what it is. As loudly and as often as possible.
The damage is already done, and continues every single day. The destruction done to this point would take months to repair, and more is coming our way. So our messaging needs to change from 'well, we care about fraud too...' to 'the administration is lying to you and stealing from the American people. An unelected, unsupervised billionaire who doesn't care about you or your family is using your belief to take down the government. This is a coup. An actual coup happening in broad daylight, and this administration will tell you anything to get you to believe differently. Don't fall for it again.'
Will this change minds? Not all of them or most of them - the facts in this Preamble will help to counteract the misinformation, though. And when the cards fall, I have to believe every single time we tell the truth, we share the facts, and we scream what is actually happening creates enough friction for light to get in, just a little bit.
Oh the government waste thing is absolutely a smoke screen. They don’t give a flying you know what about that.
Sharon you and your team are doing the work the mainstream media should be doing. (But keep it up.) This is why your site is on the top of many lists advising people where to get honest in-depth news. I look forward every day to what you have to say; I know I will be enlightened. Thank you.
As a math nerd, I appreciate this article so much. If DOGE is going to have a website with "receipts" do we need a Governerd site that tracks the real numbers with actual receipts, like a watchDOGE site? 😂 One that goes line by line and debunks their numbers.
How. How are they (DOGE) getting away with this? This information is clearly inaccurate and not true. Can anything be done to stop this? I’m at a loss. I wrote to my Representative about my concerns about Musk and DOGE and his response was less than encouraging and I think he even lied about a few things. I’m tired of my government lying through its teeth.
I am lucky enough to have sane Democrats as my representatives in House and Senate at the federal level. Still, I know they are flailing and don't quite know how to handle this mess. But at least I know they are trying and respond to questions and concerns thruthfully. I guess I would keep contacting my representative if I felt they were waffling on the seriousness of this and/or lying. Let them know that you expect to hear facts from them and that you expect them to adhere to the oath they took to uphold the Constitution and their duties as a check-and-balance to power - and you don't feel they are meeting your expectations. (I've done this with my state Rep and Senator [who happen to be Republicans] when their responses have been less than satisfactory regarding some local issues. I don't think I will change their minds, necessarily, but I want them to know I'm aware of facts and that they should not beleive they have a "mandate" in their districts.)
It's all so exhausting and demoralizing!
My senators didn’t even respond to my inquiries, so I guess I’m glad at least one person took the time to reply, even if it wasn’t what I wanted to hear.
There is no way they "renegotiated" any significant contracts in less than a month, either.
That the general math and understanding of govt. contracts is wrong to me is amusing - it's so easy to see they don't know what they're doing and don't care enough to even make it look like they do (we all know they have no problem lying, so why not do it better?). But even better is I don't believe they've uncovered a single instance of actual fraud, waste, or abuse. If they had it's alllll they would talk about.
One of the key things that gives me hope that democracy will endure is the general carelessness and lack of attention to detail that people like Trump, Musk, and many of the lesser qualified people around him have. (There are less careless people around him that I consider a true danger.) They're not being clever, or cunning - they're wrecking balls with the power to cause real harm - but at the end of the day Trump doesn't have much depth. I have to hope that the growing resistance will succeed if we keep pushing!
Just wandered over to Heather Cox Richardson’s post today and got the same vibes 🙌🏻 They’re doubling down on chaos and it’s not going to fool the American people https://open.substack.com/pub/heathercoxrichardson/p/february-23-2025?r=40eaxd&utm_medium=ios
Thank you for the amazing work you’re doing! #riseoftheresistance