TL;DR: Elon Musk's Controversial Government Initiative, DOGE, Sparks Debate on Public Spending
Launched in 2025, Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) aimed to cut $2 trillion in federal fraud and waste but fell significantly short of its goals. Despite achieving only $21.7 billion in savings, Musk's allies claim its success lies in promoting a cultural shift toward efficiency, job cuts, and encouraging public-private partnerships. However, critics argue that the initiative caused more harm than good, leading to poor management, workforce disruption, and financial losses. DOGE serves as a cautionary tale for entrepreneurs working with government systems: setting realistic goals and planning sustainably are crucial.
Want to learn how to seize opportunities in public-private innovation? Join the Fe/male Switch community.
“`html
DOGE Did Not Find $2T in Fraud, but That Doesn’t Matter, Musk Allies Say
In 2026, the political and financial worlds are still debating the controversial legacy of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Initially hailed as a game-changing federal initiative with promises to unearth $2 trillion in fraud and waste, DOGE’s results have proven far less dramatic. Critics were quick to pounce, but Musk’s allies argue the project wasn’t about hitting arbitrary numbers, it was about ushering cultural reform to federal spending inefficiencies.
As a European entrepreneur with deep interests in government systems and accountability, I find DOGE’s story both fascinating and troubling. It reflects how public-private experiments designed to “streamline” government often lack the depth and nuance required for complex bureaucracies. Let’s break down what truly happened, where Musk’s ambitions derailed, and why some still view DOGE as a success.
What Was DOGE’s Original Objective?
Launched on President Trump’s first day in office in January 2025, DOGE was touted as a disruption-focused unit led by Elon Musk. Its ambitious goal was to “cut at least $2 trillion” in government fraud and excessive programs. The public was promised transparency, accountability, and a government run with startup-like efficiency.
According to Ars Technica, this vision quickly lost momentum. The original $2 trillion claim was reduced to $1 trillion, and later to a modest $150 billion. By mid-2025, reports showed DOGE had failed to make any significant dent in systemic fraud but had caused extensive disruption in federal workforce operations.
- Original claim: $2 trillion in savings.
- Mid-2025 adjustment: $150 billion target.
- Outcome: $21.7 billion in alleged improper cuts.
To provide context, $2 trillion represents approximately a quarter of the federal budget. Hitting that number would have required impossible cuts across essential programs like Social Security and Medicare, realizations that Musk and his team likely knew but didn’t publicly acknowledge.
Why Musk Allies Insist Results Don’t Matter
Despite DOGE’s inability to uncover significant fraud, Musk loyalists have pivoted their narrative to emphasize its “higher purpose.” They argue the initiative succeeded because it shifted the cultural conversation. Here’s the spin Musk’s supporters are pushing:
- DOGE reduced the federal workforce, cutting 9% of jobs, marking the largest peacetime workforce reduction.
- It introduced private sector efficiency metrics to government processes.
- It encouraged new conversations about digital automation in public administration.
- Several unconventional public-private partnerships were piloted, bringing “startup energy” into public service.
However, this narrative glosses over serious issues. The July 2025 Senate report revealed that many of DOGE’s cuts were poorly managed and led to a staggering $21.7 billion in waste. Contract terminations led to expensive penalties, and some agencies lost critical personnel who were never replaced. A significant portion of the public still views DOGE as a failure, and Musk has since distanced himself from the project.
The attempt to reframe the conversation as a “cultural victory” is familiar to entrepreneurs, particularly those in tech, where pivots and missed milestones are part of the game. But it invites the question: when accountability is the core promise, how can you claim success without delivering it?
The European Perspective: What Entrepreneurs Can Learn
As a European founder, I see parallels between initiatives like DOGE and misguided attempts at government-funded innovation programs in Europe. Whether it’s blockchain or green energy incentives, these initiatives often lean too heavily on buzzwords or lofty promises without concrete execution plans.
- Key Takeaways for Founders:
- Set realistic goals. Overpromising leads to skepticism and backlash.
- Execution matters more than big headlines. A half-baked solution can do more harm than good.
- Understand your system. Government innovation is inherently slow and bureaucratic, it’s nothing like launching a startup.
European founders often struggle with bureaucracy, but the opposite extreme, gutting the system outright or chasing unicorn-like solutions, doesn’t work either. DOGE’s missteps should remind us to approach similar projects with humility and planning. Governments are not startups, and scaling inefficiency requires much more than a flashy press conference.
Looking Ahead: What Comes Next for Public-Private Collaboration?
DOGE serves as a cautionary tale for future public-private initiatives. Its failure highlights the need for clear methodologies, realistic metrics, and, most importantly, greater accountability. As Musk himself admitted in late 2025, “Politics isn’t for me, it’s too messy. I like building things.” The sentiment reflects the disconnect between Silicon Valley’s pace and the pragmatic realities of systemic change.
For policy developers and entrepreneurs alike, the lesson is clear: big ideas must be backed by sustainable, well-thought-out execution plans. The next wave of collaboration will likely focus on smaller, incremental improvements rather than sweeping reforms. This could open doors for tech-focused small businesses specializing in AI, automation, and analytics to play vital roles in modernizing government structures.
As entrepreneurs, the opportunity lies in identifying these small but scalable niches. Because even as grand experiments like DOGE falter, they create openings for builders to address what remains unresolved. Now more than ever, the public sector needs the startup world, but only when the approach is smarter and calibrated to reality.
Want to learn how to navigate these opportunities as a founder? Let’s keep the discussion going in the Fe/male Switch community.
“`FAQ on DOGE and Its Impact in 2026
What was the primary goal of the DOGE initiative?
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) was launched with the ambitious goal of reducing government waste and fraud by cutting at least $2 trillion from the federal budget. Spearheaded by Elon Musk and supported by then-President Trump, DOGE aimed to increase accountability, transparency, and efficiency in federal spending. It initially promised to bring a startup-like disruption to the often-criticized bureaucracy. However, as reports emerged, the $2 trillion target was adjusted multiple times, eventually falling to a mere $150 billion. Despite these adjustments, the initiative resulted in workforce cuts, pilot projects, and controversial impacts. Read about DOGE’s origins on Ars Technica.
How much money did DOGE actually save?
Although DOGE claimed an original target of $2 trillion, its reported outcomes fell drastically short. By mid-2025, DOGE’s efforts were said to have resulted in $21.7 billion in alleged savings through improper cuts, as revealed in a Senate report. This amount is significantly below its promised targets and raises questions about its efficiency. Contract terminations and workforce reductions made up a large portion of the alleged savings but also led to penalties and disruptions. Explore more details via The Guardian.
Why do Musk's allies believe DOGE was a success despite missing its financial targets?
Musk’s allies argue that the true success of DOGE lies not in financial outcomes but in the cultural reforms it ushered in. They highlight its focus on introducing private sector efficiency metrics, increasing digital automation, and fostering public-private partnerships. The initiative succeeded in sparking conversations about government streamlining, which Musk supporters see as a long-term win. However, critics question this narrative, given the disruption and mismanagement reported during its implementation. Learn more with Ars Technica’s analysis.
What led to DOGE's reduced targets and eventual shortcomings?
The initial goal of cutting $2 trillion from the federal budget required monumental reductions, equivalent to a quarter of the budget, affecting essential programs like Medicare and Social Security. The unrealistic scale of these cuts soon became evident, leading to the target’s downgrade to $1 trillion and then $150 billion. Mismanagement, rapid decisions, and a lack of understanding of government systems further prevented significant progress. Discover more via Cato Institute’s analysis.
How did DOGE impact the federal workforce?
DOGE resulted in a 9% reduction of the federal workforce, marking the largest peacetime cut in U.S. history. While lauded by some for tackling bloated government systems, the sudden workforce changes disrupted operations and caused unforeseen challenges, such as the loss of critical personnel. Many positions were left unfilled, leading to gaps in federal service efficiency. Explore the workforce reduction insights on Brookings.
What were the major criticisms DOGE faced?
Critics of DOGE focused on multiple shortcomings, including the mishandling of budget cuts, increased penalties caused by terminated contracts, and wasted public funds. A Senate report highlighted $21.7 billion in waste resulting from its poorly executed processes. Additional criticism stems from its reliance on untested technologies and failure to provide transparency promised at inception. The initiative stands as a cautionary tale of overpromising without concrete planning. Find critical insights on The Senate Democrats’ report.
What did DOGE achieve in terms of cultural shift?
While falling short financially, DOGE fueled discussions about revamping public administration. It introduced private-sector practices into federal systems and evaluated ways to integrate automation and innovative technologies into bureaucracy. These discussions created an awareness about government efficiency, even though significant structural changes have yet to materialize. Delve into how DOGE influenced cultural reform on Forbes.
How is DOGE’s legacy viewed internationally?
DOGE’s mixed results have offered valuable lessons for similar initiatives abroad. European entrepreneurs, facing excessive bureaucracy, found parallels between DOGE and failed systemic reforms in Europe, such as blockchain and green energy incentives. The international takeaway is that government reforms require clear methodologies and realistic expectations, unlike DOGE’s broad-cut approach.
What lessons should entrepreneurs draw from DOGE’s challenges?
Entrepreneurs should prioritize setting achievable goals, executing detailed plans, and respecting the complexities of public systems. Government reforms aren’t startups; they demand nuanced strategies rather than overreliance on bold projections. DOGE highlights the pitfalls of overpromising and underscores the value of adaptive planning and well-researched execution. Learn how to plan better with Cato Institute.
What does DOGE’s failure mean for future public-private initiatives?
DOGE reflects the challenges of merging startup agility with bureaucratic systems but also opens opportunities for new collaborations. Future projects are expected to focus on incremental changes, targeting specialized areas like AI and analytics in government functions. Smaller, scalable initiatives could offer better results, fostering meaningful public-private collaborations over time. Check out potential government-focused innovations at Ars Technica.
About the Author
Violetta Bonenkamp, also known as MeanCEO, is an experienced startup founder with an impressive educational background including an MBA and four other higher education degrees. She has over 20 years of work experience across multiple countries, including 5 years as a solopreneur and serial entrepreneur. Throughout her startup experience she has applied for multiple startup grants at the EU level, in the Netherlands and Malta, and her startups received quite a few of those. She’s been living, studying and working in many countries around the globe and her extensive multicultural experience has influenced her immensely.
Violetta is a true multiple specialist who has built expertise in Linguistics, Education, Business Management, Blockchain, Entrepreneurship, Intellectual Property, Game Design, AI, SEO, Digital Marketing, cyber security and zero code automations. Her extensive educational journey includes a Master of Arts in Linguistics and Education, an Advanced Master in Linguistics from Belgium (2006-2007), an MBA from Blekinge Institute of Technology in Sweden (2006-2008), and an Erasmus Mundus joint program European Master of Higher Education from universities in Norway, Finland, and Portugal (2009).
She is the founder of Fe/male Switch, a startup game that encourages women to enter STEM fields, and also leads CADChain, and multiple other projects like the Directory of 1,000 Startup Cities with a proprietary MeanCEO Index that ranks cities for female entrepreneurs. Violetta created the “gamepreneurship” methodology, which forms the scientific basis of her startup game. She also builds a lot of SEO tools for startups. Her achievements include being named one of the top 100 women in Europe by EU Startups in 2022 and being nominated for Impact Person of the year at the Dutch Blockchain Week. She is an author with Sifted and a speaker at different Universities. Recently she published a book on Startup Idea Validation the right way: from zero to first customers and beyond, launched a Directory of 1,500+ websites for startups to list themselves in order to gain traction and build backlinks and is building MELA AI to help local restaurants in Malta get more visibility online.
For the past several years Violetta has been living between the Netherlands and Malta, while also regularly traveling to different destinations around the globe, usually due to her entrepreneurial activities. This has led her to start writing about different locations and amenities from the point of view of an entrepreneur. Here’s her recent article about the best hotels in Italy to work from.
