Joe, thanks for trying to shed an objective light on this. There needs to be full transparency and verification of what DOGE is actually doing and actually accomplishing or not, and the consequences. Typically, it is just the subject of propagandist spin either for or against it.
Maybe it's time to revisit some basics. Like who's supposed to do what now and under what authority overall within the federal government. I know some of that has been covered here but it seems like one questions and inflicts about these matters with respect to DOGE in particular. Congress enacts the laws and thereby establishes the various federal agencies and administrative departments. However these agencies and administrative departments are under the control and execution and implementation of the executive branch, ie the president and his cabinet and staff. The congressional "laws" are statutory and provide the sometimes broad brush elements of administration. However, the fact is, and everybody knows that the code of federal regulations (CFR) is much much larger than the United States Code (USC) statutes. So this means, de facto, that in practice the executive branch does more quasi legislative "law-making" activity than Congress. So this should imply that the executive branch can do anything within the letter of the governing statutes in carrying out and implementing the laws, managing the administrative agencies, etc. Obviously there's going to be room for disagreement on the meaning of those laws and that's probably about where we sit now. But the fundamental structure has been for Congress to legislate broadly and thereby delegate broadly to the executive. If they don't like it, perhaps they should take a hard look in the mirror and legislate more narrowly and delegate less.
Good revisit! Congress gave away lots of power and built an executive branch that is hard to reform. I believe DOGE will be more successful working through Congress than Executive Order. Congress has also failed to invest in its own capabilities for various reasons, leaving it weak. Reducing the CFR may be a huge place of victory for DOGE, regardless of the budget impact.
I'm concerned that it costs $45 million (and more?) to cut spending. Seriously?
Maybe DOGE is out of control, but I strongly support dramatic spending cuts. There will be pain, and we need to realize which parts of government should actually get more funding. CISA is one example I'd give (perhaps the only one) where increased funding, not cuts, is justified.
It's said that "Generals always fight the previous war". Well, it's critical to predict what future warfare will be and I'm quite sure cyber warfare will be the most important now and in the future. So cut a few trillion from our military budget and reallocate half of it to CISA.
The rest of government... well... slash, burn, rip it out!
Joe, thanks for trying to shed an objective light on this. There needs to be full transparency and verification of what DOGE is actually doing and actually accomplishing or not, and the consequences. Typically, it is just the subject of propagandist spin either for or against it.
Maybe it's time to revisit some basics. Like who's supposed to do what now and under what authority overall within the federal government. I know some of that has been covered here but it seems like one questions and inflicts about these matters with respect to DOGE in particular. Congress enacts the laws and thereby establishes the various federal agencies and administrative departments. However these agencies and administrative departments are under the control and execution and implementation of the executive branch, ie the president and his cabinet and staff. The congressional "laws" are statutory and provide the sometimes broad brush elements of administration. However, the fact is, and everybody knows that the code of federal regulations (CFR) is much much larger than the United States Code (USC) statutes. So this means, de facto, that in practice the executive branch does more quasi legislative "law-making" activity than Congress. So this should imply that the executive branch can do anything within the letter of the governing statutes in carrying out and implementing the laws, managing the administrative agencies, etc. Obviously there's going to be room for disagreement on the meaning of those laws and that's probably about where we sit now. But the fundamental structure has been for Congress to legislate broadly and thereby delegate broadly to the executive. If they don't like it, perhaps they should take a hard look in the mirror and legislate more narrowly and delegate less.
Good revisit! Congress gave away lots of power and built an executive branch that is hard to reform. I believe DOGE will be more successful working through Congress than Executive Order. Congress has also failed to invest in its own capabilities for various reasons, leaving it weak. Reducing the CFR may be a huge place of victory for DOGE, regardless of the budget impact.
I'm concerned that it costs $45 million (and more?) to cut spending. Seriously?
Maybe DOGE is out of control, but I strongly support dramatic spending cuts. There will be pain, and we need to realize which parts of government should actually get more funding. CISA is one example I'd give (perhaps the only one) where increased funding, not cuts, is justified.
It's said that "Generals always fight the previous war". Well, it's critical to predict what future warfare will be and I'm quite sure cyber warfare will be the most important now and in the future. So cut a few trillion from our military budget and reallocate half of it to CISA.
The rest of government... well... slash, burn, rip it out!