logo
Texas' DOGE committee takes inspiration from Elon Musk's federal operation

Texas' DOGE committee takes inspiration from Elon Musk's federal operation

Yahoo07-03-2025

A few weeks after Elon Musk waved a chainsaw at a conservative gathering touting the Department of Government Efficiency's federal cost cutting efforts, the Texas House kicked off the first meeting for its own version of DOGE.
Leaders of the Delivery of Government Efficiency committee in the House are following in Musk's footsteps, promising sweeping changes and reductions to the size of state government. Committee Chair Giovanni Capriglione, R-Southlake, told The Texas Tribune that DOGE in Texas share's goals with its federal namesake in trying to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in government.
'We're going to make long-term changes in how we operate here for the state,' Capriglione said. 'This is about, 'How do we fundamentally change the way the state operates so you can do it in a much more efficient way?''
So far, Musk's operation in the nation's capital has fired more than 30,000 federal employees with more layoffs to come, drawing sharp pushback from Democrats and some concerns from Republicans. DOGE's website has claimed to cut about $105 billion as of Monday, though that amount is unverifiable and is expected to be much lower.
Asked about statewide layoffs, Capriglione said the committee 'doesn't have the authority to go and terminate employees,' though members may recommend funding reductions to agencies that yield staffing cuts.
Democrats on the committee say they're optimistic about the opportunity to find inefficiencies, but are wary of their colleagues trying to emulate the rapidfire layoffs and cuts happening at the federal level. What Musk's DOGE has done is 'completely terrifying,' and is putting the health and safety of millions of Americans at risk, said Rep. Ana-María Rodríguez Ramos, one of the five Democrats on the committee. She doesn't want Texas to replicate what DOGE is doing in Washington, D.C.
'I would be the fiercest fighter against that, because what they're doing at the federal level is just outrageous and the consequences are going to be harmful for decades,' said Rodríguez Ramos, who is the chair of the Texas Legislative Progressive Caucus.
DOGE committee Vice Chair Salman Bhojani, D-Euless, said during DOGE's first hearing Wednesday that the committee must avoid 'partisan rhetoric.' He said that unlike Congress, members of the Texas legislature work in a bipartisan manner and he expects that will be the case with the state's version of DOGE.
'Texas can lead the way with responsible and efficient government,' Bhojani said during the hearing. 'But let me be clear, my focus is not about cutting essential services or devaluing hardworking public servants. I'm here to work with you, not against you, to improve how we serve Texans.'
Some of Musk's efforts with DOGE have sparked chaos in federal agencies. The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently fired some employees who were working to address bird flu, only to since request those employees come back. The Trump administration has also had to reverse the layoffs of hundreds of federal employees who work on the nation's nuclear weapons programs.
As a legislative committee, there's a 'fundamental difference' between what the Texas and federal versions of DOGE are capable of doing, Capriglione said. Rather than focusing on public staffing cuts, in its early days, committee leaders will focus on finding areas to recommend for modernizing outdated state technology systems and auditing government agencies.
According to the House resolution that created Texas' DOGE, the committee's jurisdiction includes topics like cybersecurity, artificial intelligence and 'emerging technology.' The committee will also likely hear bills on similar topics, Capriglione said. So far, 27 bills have been referred to the committee, including proposals related to auditing state agencies and increasing government pay transparency.
He added that Texas' DOGE aims to be a 'one-stop shop' for Texans to bring forward their grievances about state government services. In an op-ed in the Dallas Morning News published last week, Capriglione said that reducing government spending is a 'central part of [his] political career.'
'This committee will operate with precision,' Capriglione said during Wednesday's hearing. 'At times, we will use a scalpel, carefully dissecting inefficiencies to make government work smarter. At other times, we will wield a sledgehammer, tearing down systemic waste and corruption that may have gone unchallenged.'
The committee has 13 members, including Capriglione, with eight Republicans and five Democrats. Like other committees, DOGE will hear public testimony on proposed legislation and vote those bills out of committee so they can receive a vote on the House floor.
Texas isn't the only state that has followed in the federal government's footsteps by creating its own DOGE. Some other Republican-led states, including Florida and Iowa, have created their own versions, with some in the form of legislative committees and others created as additional government divisions.
Rep. David Cook, a Mansfield Republican, said the bipartisan nature of the committee and its inclusion of elected officials represent the biggest difference between the Texas DOGE and the Washington, D.C. operation. But he added that the 'goals will be similar' between the two.
'This is an example of where the federal government came up with a really good idea,' Cook said. '[Texans] want their government to be efficient and implement good, common sense policies.'
Texas already has another legislative commission that is responsible for reviewing waste and inefficiency in state government. The Texas Sunset Advisory Commission — made up of two members of the public, and five members of the House and Senate alike — has abolished 95 state agencies since its inception in 1977. According to the commission's website, it will review about 130 agencies over the next 12 years.
Poncho Nevárez, a former Democratic state representative and past member of the commission, said since the Sunset Advisory Commission does not review each agency every legislative session, the DOGE committee could help fill that gap. If an agency is not scheduled to be reviewed by the commission during a particular session, then the DOGE committee might have the ability to look into that agency, he added. But Nevárez is still wary that the Texas DOGE will try to 'slash and burn' funding like Musk is doing in Washington.
He noted the irony of Republicans railing about waste when they have had control of every statewide office and the Legislature for decades. The last time a Democrat won statewide office in Texas was 1994.
'Well shit, who's been running that government for almost 30 years?' Nevárez said. 'They act like all of these agencies have been running on their own. But all those are Republican appointees.'
We can't wait to welcome you to the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Step inside the conversations shaping the future of education, the economy, health care, energy, technology, public safety, culture, the arts and so much more.
Hear from our CEO, Sonal Shah, on TribFest 2025.
TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

OpenAI and Anthropic are getting cozy with government. What could possibly go wrong?
OpenAI and Anthropic are getting cozy with government. What could possibly go wrong?

Fast Company

time12 minutes ago

  • Fast Company

OpenAI and Anthropic are getting cozy with government. What could possibly go wrong?

While the world and private enterprise are adopting AI rapidly in their workflows, government isn't far behind. The U.K. government has said early trials of AI-powered productivity tools can shave two weeks of labor off a year's work, and AI companies are adapting to that need. More than 1,700 AI use cases have been recorded in the U.S. government, long before Elon Musk's DOGE entered the equation and accelerated AI adoption throughout the public sector. Federal policies introduced in April on AI adoption and procurement have pushed this trend further. It's unsurprising that big tech companies are rolling out their own specialist models to meet that demand. Anthropic, the maker of the Claude chatbot, announced last week a series of models tailored for use by government employees. These include features such as the ability to handle classified materials and understand some of the bureaucratic language that plagues official documents. Anthropic has said its models are already deployed by agencies 'at the highest level of U.S. national security, and access to these models is limited to those who operate in such classified environments.' The announcement follows a similar one by OpenAI, the makers of ChatGPT, which released its own government-tailored AI models in January to 'streamline government agencies' access to OpenAI's frontier models.' But AI experts worry about governments becoming overly reliant on AI models, which can hallucinate information, inherit biases that discriminate against certain groups at scale, or steer policy in misguided directions. They also express concern over governments being locked into specific providers, who may later increase prices that taxpayers would be left to fund. 'I worry about governments using this kind of technology and relying on tech companies, and in particular, tech companies who have proven to be quite untrustworthy,' says Carissa Véliz, who researches AI ethics at the University of Oxford. She points out that the generative AI revolution so far, sparked by the November 2022 release of ChatGPT, has seen governments scrambling to retrofit rules and regulations in areas such as copyright to accommodate tech companies after they've bent those rules. 'It just shows a power relationship there that doesn't look good for government,' says Véliz. 'Government is supposed to be the legislator, the one making the rules and enforcing the rules.' Beyond those moral concerns, she also worries about the financial stakes involved. 'There's just a sheer dependency on a company that has financial interests, that is based in a different country, in a situation in which geopolitics is getting quite complicated,' says Véliz, explaining why countries outside the United States might hesitate to sign on to use ClaudeGov or ChatGPT Gov. It's the same argument the U.S. uses about overreliance on TikTok, which has Chinese ties, amid fears that figures like Donald Trump could pressure U.S.-based firms to act in politically motivated ways. OpenAI didn't respond to Fast Company 's request for comment. A spokesperson for Anthropic says the company is committed to transparency, citing published work on model risks, a detailed system card, and collaborations with the U.S. and U.K. governments to test AI systems. Some fear that AI companies are securing 'those big DoD bucks,' as programmer Ashe Dryden put it on Mastodon, and could perpetuate that revenue by fostering dependency on their specific models. The rollout of these models reflects broader shifts in the tech landscape that increasingly tie government, national security and technology together. For example, defense tech firm Anduril recently raised $5 billion in a new funding round that values the company at over $30 billion. Others have argued that the release of these government-specific models by AI companies 'isn't [about] national security. This is narrative laundering,' as one LinkedIn commenter put it. The idea is that these moves echo the norms already set by big government rather than challenging them, potentially reinforcing existing issues. 'I've always been a sceptic of a single supplier for IT services, and this is no exception,' says Andres Guadamuz, an AI researcher at the University of Sussex. Guadamuz believes the development of government-specific AI models is still in its early phase, and urges decisionmakers to pause before signing deals. 'Governments should keep their options open,' he says. 'Particularly with a crowded AI market, large entities such as the government can have a better negotiating position.'

Dem Golden Boy Abrego Garcia Returns
Dem Golden Boy Abrego Garcia Returns

Fox News

time13 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Dem Golden Boy Abrego Garcia Returns

Well the Democrats got their wish, their martyr Kilmar Abrego Garcia returned to the US to face charges. I'm Tomi Lahren, more next. The Democrats' golden boy Kilmar Abrego Garcia was brought back to the US from his home country of El Salvador to face charges including human trafficking here in Tennessee. In an interview with NBC News, President Trump said it wasn't his decision to bring Abrego Garcia back to the US but that the DOJ decided to do it that way and that's fine. I can't help but think what a giant waste of US taxpayers dollars it was to fly him all the way back here, go through the rigamarole of criminal charges, pay for his room and board, all to send him right back to his home country of El Salvador. But THIS is what the Democrats want. They'll do anything to keep their illegal aliens in your community and they'll waste your hard earned money to do it and stretch out the process as long as possible. This is the hill they're willing to die on and this is the man they're willing to defend till the end. A man who was here illegally for years, has credible allegations of gang affiliation, protective orders from his wife, and actual footage of his alleged human trafficking. Ladies and gentlemen, the Democrat Party is for they/them and Abrego Garcia, not for you! I'm Tomi Lahren and you watch my show 'Tomi Lahren is Fearless' at Learn more about your ad choices. Visit

Washington Post editorial admits colleges must take 'strenuous action' to restore free exchange of ideas
Washington Post editorial admits colleges must take 'strenuous action' to restore free exchange of ideas

Fox News

time13 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Washington Post editorial admits colleges must take 'strenuous action' to restore free exchange of ideas

Harvard may win its legal battle against the Trump administration, but the fight to restore confidence in higher education as defenders of the "free exchange of ideas" would still be far from over, The Washington Post editorial board wrote on Tuesday. "In the past decade, trust in higher education has dropped precipitously. Ten years ago, a robust majority of Americans told Gallup they had a 'great deal' or 'quite a lot' of confidence in higher education; today, only one-third of Americans say the same," the editorial stated, highlighting similar concerns over an uptick in those who say they have "very little" or "no" confidence in higher education. That percentage rose to 32% from 10% a decade ago. Such discontent with higher education has created opportunities for Republicans to seize on the trend and "attack the foundations of academic independence," the board argued. A cocktail of problems, ranging from free speech concerns to rising costs and lower returns on investment, was said to have fed into the growing distrust. In one corner, conservative faculty members have reported self-censoring due to fear of how others might respond to their opinions. The Post argued this isn't isolated to one group, however, and that left-wing voices are also choosing to stay quiet when controversial topics are discussed. "In an academic community in which 'diversity statements' are required of new hires (and professors can be denied jobs merely for criticizing them), university administrations and disciplines issue official statements embracing social justice causes, journal editors apologize for or withdraw papers that offend the left, and conservative professors are becoming an increasingly endangered species, even moderates or those on the center-left can reasonably wonder what they're allowed to say, and universities can seem drastically out of step with mainstream society," the editorial said. The editorial board went on to say that institutions of higher education lack a solid foundation to demand that the government respect their "academic freedom" unless they demand the same from their own teachers and leaders. "The worst of this political fever might be behind us, but academia will have to take strenuous action to restore its reputation as defenders of the free exchange of ideas…" "Renaming the diversity, equity and inclusion office will not suffice; they need to foster a campus environment in which the frank discussion of ideas is the core value. If they do not, they will find the public yawning as conservative attacks intensify and courts struggle to contain the damage," the Post's editorial board continued.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store