Forum

Sometimes valiant and noble efforts are rebuffed by forces that feed on darkness. The planned failure of the DOGE initiative was destined to fail from its inception!

When Elon Musk launched the Department of Government Efficiency, dubbed DOGE by admirers and critics alike, many thought it might finally be the moment America’s bloated federal machinery would meet its match. Here was the world’s most celebrated entrepreneur, a man who had upended industries as disparate as electric vehicles and rocketry, turning his attention to the inefficiency and waste that so many taxpayers resent.

Yet in the end, DOGE failed to deliver the sweeping cuts or transformative reforms its founder envisioned. Not because Musk lacked vision, willpower, or genius, but because the bloated federal government is designed to resist precisely the kind of radical productivity gains and cost discipline that have made Musk successful in private enterprise.

In announcing DOGE’s retreat, Musk himself summed up the dilemma: “Accelerating GDP growth is essential. DOGE has and will do tremendous work to postpone the day of bankruptcy of America, but the profligacy of government means that only radical improvements in productivity can save our country.”

Why couldn’t even Musk bend Washington to his will? Musk is a brilliant businessman but not a bureaucrat! To understand DOGE’s fate, we must first acknowledge that government is a fundamentally different animal from a profit-driven company.

In the marketplace, success is measured by profit and loss, the clearest signals of value creation or destruction. A business leader can cut costs, streamline operations, and see immediately whether customers are happier and shareholders are richer.

But in government, there is no profit-loss mechanism. A federal agency does not produce a good that consumers can freely reject. It operates under political incentives: regulations, entitlements, and appropriations negotiated among thousands of interests. A bureaucrat’s performance is judged not by market feedback but by compliance with rules and satisfaction with political patrons.

It is an ever-consuming leviathan of indulgence with an unlimited appetite and the ability to satiate itself on the taxes of the people.

DOGE’s efforts to “find fraud and waste” may have yielded headlines, but in budgetary terms the sums were rounding errors. Musk’s proposals to downsize agencies like USAID or the Department of Education were quickly undone in Congress. And even where cost savings were possible, vested interests rose to defend their funding streams.

Congressional politics revolves around what political scientists call pork-barrel spending. Legislators get reelected by directing federal dollars to their districts, whether for highways, subsidies, or defense contracts. The more a representative can secure, the more popular he becomes at home. That is why the “Big, Beautiful Bill” that passed in the House contained no meaningful DOGE cuts. Instead, it refunded many of the same programs Musk targeted.

The issue is not a flaw or corruption in the system; it is the system. As long as voters reward politicians who deliver benefits, and as long as legislators see debt as a distant problem, spending will expand inexorably.

Even term limits may force-feed spendaholics to consume more, in greater quantity with heaping proportions, because they know their gorging at the public trough is limited and their reservation will expire.

Look at it this way. Musk’s predicament is hardly unique. Decades ago, some voters imagined Donald Trump, a businessman, would fix Washington through sheer dealmaking. Before that, Ross Perot ran on a similar promise. The fairytale dream of efficiency reoccurs every few election cycles.

Washington echoes the impossible axiom. “If only someone who understands business were in charge, the government would finally become lean and efficient.” 

Government is not designed for efficiency. It is built to mediate competing claims, to spread benefits widely and costs thinly, and to avoid the political pain of saying no. That is why entitlements and defense budgets are held as ‘holy sacrosanct’ for the obese spendaholics. Cutting them, even if it might help balance the books in the long term, triggers immediate hot political backlash that no administration can withstand.

A corporate turnaround can be swift and decisive, laying off workers, exiting bad lines, and refocusing on profitability. A government turnaround triggers protests in fifty states and guarantees electoral annihilation. And so the bureaucracy endures, accumulating mandates and debts, a behemoth collapsing under its contradictions.

DOGE’s planned failure is not a judgment on Musk’s intelligence or ambition. It is a demonstration of how resistant the state is to business logic. Efficiency experts alone cannot “fix” a system that governs hundreds of millions of people and redistributes trillions of dollars.

Let's face it. Musk's heart was in the right place, and his bold and noble effort was cheered on by all thrifty-minded Americans, but the Washington swamp leviathan knew from day one his effort must fail. Washington will spare no cost to force DOGE to fail, regardless of what it takes or how expensive it becomes.

Elon Musk, more than almost anyone alive, has shown how to create wealth, cut costs, and expand human possibility. But no entrepreneur, however visionary, can rewire the incentives of a system that rewards spending over saving.

Final Word: The bureaucratic leviathan ate the richest man in the world for breakfast but left enough of him intact so he can keep paying his taxes.