What’s New, Bureaucrat?

By konoplizkaya @Adobe Stock

Beware Smaller Government

Should you be forgiven for thinking that life on earth, as you have known it, is about to change? James Freeman, in the WSJ, writes about why you should be given a little grace.

Statists are pulling out every tool in the rhetorical shed to attack the Department of Government Efficiency campaign against wasteful spending. If you don’t like one argument against the job Mr. Musk is doing for the President, just wait a few moments and you’re sure to hear another one.

“Day by day, Americans are getting more alarmed by the slash-and-burn approach DOGE is taking to basic government programs,” intones Senator Chuck Schumer (D, N.Y.). Mr. Schumer also “hastened to argue that the savings that may result from Musk’s recommendations are far smaller than the tax restraints included in the pending reconciliation bill in Congress,” reports Mr. Freeman.

Perhaps Sen. Schumer intended his remarks as an homage to one of his most famous constituents. “Trump’s spending reductions are terrible—and such small portions,” a character might say if Woody Allen ever makes a film set in Washington. What’s New, Bureaucrat? 

The Fear Factor 

Few Americans expect a fair and balanced portrayal of Mr. Trump’s management of the executive branch from his partisan opponents.  So it’s hardly a surprise when the NYT goes “full Schumer:”

Separate stories from the Gray Lady portray the Musk efficiency work as a disturbing threat to society and also a largely meaningless public-relations exercise.

From the NYT’s Emily Anthes and Apoorva Mandavilli:

Shortly after taking office for the second time, President Trump began making deep cuts to agencies and programs that play critical roles in human health, slashing funding for medical research, halting global health aid, and firing scores of workers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

But the campaign to downsize government, which has been led by Mr. Trump and Elon Musk, has also hollowed out agencies and programs devoted to protecting plant and animal health. The recent wave of mass firings hit federal workers responding to the nation’s growing bird flu outbreak, protecting crops from damaging pests and ensuring the safety of pet food and medicine, among other critical duties.

James Freeman sounds the alarms:

… our crops will be ravaged, flu will spread unchecked throughout the land and now our pets are in danger? Even when the reporters qualify their alarm, the story suggests that doom has been deferred, but only for a time before we see the horrific consequences of slightly smaller government.

From the NYT:

Although the government has since rescinded some of these firings, the terminations — combined with a federal hiring freeze and buyout offers — are depleting the ranks of federal programs that are already short on employees and resources, experts said.

The damage could be long-lasting. Workers whose jobs were spared said that the upheaval had left them eyeing the exits, and graduate students said they were reconsidering careers in the federal government. The shrinking work force could also have far-reaching consequences for trade and food security and leave the nation unequipped to tackle future threats to plant and animal health, experts said.

“There’s a lot of fat to be cut, “Mr. Freeman shocks readers.

… given Washington’s $36 trillion in debt and now habitual massive annual deficits, is for significant numbers of federal workers to eye the exits and then proceed right through them. Washington also needs to spend less on contractors, and most importantly on transfer payments—especially if the recipients are able-bodied people in their prime working years.

Two Papers in One? 

James Freeman, looking on the bright side:

… another story in the same publication suggests that Mr. Musk actually hasn’t been doing much trimming at all. Looking on the bright side, at least Times subscribers appear to be getting two papers in one.

Taxpayers are certainly going to be disappointed if a spending cut turns out to be $8 million rather than $8 billion, as reports the NYT, but some may also wonder why no one had flagged the earlier, erroneous entry suggesting a contract was worth the relevant agency’s entire budget.

The NYT accuses Team DOGE of “taking undue credit for spending restraint …”

The largest savings on the latest version of its list is a $1.9 billion cut at the Treasury Department. But The Times reported last week that this contract was canceled last fall, when Joseph R. Biden Jr. was president — and when DOGE did not yet exist.

Wonders James Freeman, “Will the Times now run a story about the long-lasting damage Mr. Biden has done to the Treasury Department?”