Donald Trump signed an executive order on January 20th establishing a new government organization: the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). DOGE was created to cut federal spending on what Trump sees as wasted taxpayer money. According to the executive order, the initiative aims to “maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.”
DOGE is not an official government department, which would have to be established by Congress, but rather a temporary organization scheduled to end on July 4th, 2026. Many have doubted DOGE’s authority, as only Congress has the constitutional authority to cut federal spending.
Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, SpaceX, and X, is significantly involved with DOGE, but the extent of his role is unclear.
In December 2024, Trump announced that “the Great Elon Musk… will lead the Department of Government Efficiency.” However, Office of Administration Director Joshua Fischer stated Musk is “not the administrator of DOGE” but rather serves as an advisor to the President as a “non-career special government employee” who has no power to make official government decisions.
Domestic effects:
One area specifically targeted for budget trimming is education. On February 10th, Elon Musk announced on X that DOGE would cut 900 million dollars from the Institute of Educational Sciences. The IES collects data on what approaches work best for education and the state of American students’ learning. It is unclear to what degree, if any, the IES will continue to operate after these severe cuts.
However, DOGE’s cuts have not only affected government programs. Though the precise number is unknown, most major news outlets agree that over 20,000 federal employees have been fired by the new administration, upending the popularly held belief that federal employees have some of the best job security in the nation.
Also on the chopping block is public health. Both Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act have been announced as targets for DOGE’s pruning.
According to the official DOGE website, the program has “saved” an estimated 55 billion dollars, but many sources have disputed this number. National Public Radio claims that DOGE’s savings will actually come out to only 2 billion dollars because the federal government is still liable to pay for work already completed before the termination of a contract.
Additionally, on the official website, numerous clerical errors and overestimations of contract spending can be found. CBS News points to the relative inexperience of DOGE employees and their misunderstanding of government contracts.
International effects:
While DOGE policies will considerably influence the livelihoods of American citizens, they will also have significant effects on an international scale.
One specific thing that has been cut is the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which funds many clinics worldwide to help with AIDS prevention and treatment.
“One thing the GOP is very good at is test cases,” says Andrew Spieldenner, the executive director of MPACT, a global gay health and rights group. “What can they get away with? The last 4-5 years have been, ‘Oh, we can beat up trans people and no one will care… We can overturn Roe v. Wade’… They tested HIV to see what they could get away with in health.”
Additionally, the Trump administration froze all funding from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). USAID provides humanitarian and development assistance to over 100 countries for numerous issues ranging from healthcare to education.
South Sudan, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Afghanistan, Sudan, Uganda, and Ethiopia, along with many other countries, rely on the US for significant amounts of aid.
“The US’s commitment to foreign aid is changed forever,” adds Spieldenner, “if it comes back, it’ll come back looking very different.”
DOGE’s aggressive budget cuts have sparked controversy both domestically and internationally, raising concerns about the long-term consequences for education, healthcare, and foreign aid. As the program continues, its true impact remains uncertain, with debates over its effectiveness and legality transforming the political landscape.