Latest news with #DOGE-recommended
Boston Globe
16 hours ago
- Business
- Boston Globe
DOGE gets failing grade
1: The DOGE numbers don't add up. Calculating how much DOGE has saved is difficult, but it's not at all hard to see that it didn't deliver what was promised. After Musk revised down his own early projection of DOGE savings from $2 trillion to $1 trillion, the department's website now estimates it has found more than $170 billion in taxpayer savings — Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up But even that figure should be taken with a grain of salt, given that past examinations of DOGE's ' Advertisement DOGE moved to correct the error, as well as change the website to make such errors harder to find. But a Advertisement And though it may seem counterintuitive, cutting jobs doesn't actually translate to savings if it results in less productivity — if fewer IRS workers means less tax revenue is collected, for instance. An And even some Republican lawmakers have expressed unease with backing many DOGE-recommended cuts in a $9.4 billion legislative 'rescissions' package to claw back previously approved funding. House lawmakers 2: DOGE has roiled the job market. According to the latest jobs numbers, DOGE cuts contributed to a 50 percent spike in layoffs in May over the same period last year, Exacerbating the damage the firings alone have created is the chaotic way in which they were implemented. Federal agencies like the State Department, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Food and Drug Administration, National Weather Service, and the IRS are among those rushing to rehire terminated employees. That's because many of the estimated 135,000 DOGE-axed positions are for critical functions, like approving drugs and forecasting weather disasters. The layoffs' often-disorganized manner has confused dismissed workers and overtaxed remaining ones, many of whom have been asked to work overtime, volunteer to take on additional roles, or be pushed into new positions, Advertisement One former FDA worker That's not to mention the blow to communities in states where the largest percentages of federal workers are located, as well as government contractors that face secondhand profit and job losses due to the cuts. Outside of the greater Washington, D.C. region, which includes Virginia and Maryland, the hardest-hit states when it comes to canceled government contracts based on anti-DEI initiatives alone include Texas, California, North Carolina, Georgia, and Colorado — affecting politically red communities as well as blue. DOGE's harms know no partisanship. 3: The incalculable costs. On Monday a 'This was a breach of law and of trust,' wrote Judge Denise Cote in issuing the temporary injunction. 'Tens of millions of Americans depend on the Government to safeguard records that reveal their most private and sensitive affairs.' Whether some or all of DOGE's efforts to gain access to Americans' most sensitive information through agency databases will be declared unlawful is still uncertain. Challenges are still being litigated, and in a lawsuit involving DOGE access to Social Security data, the Advertisement According to Some DOGE staff have been granted temporary 'edit-access' to data, which means the information can be altered or deleted entirely within the federal system. That says nothing of the broader global impact, particularly through the dismantling of agencies like the United States Agency for International Development, which once provided critical life-saving humanitarian aid across the world. DOGE has The government claims that shuttering the agency saved Americans nearly $60 billion, or less than 1 percent of the federal budget. According to Advertisement Musk is already back to playing with his cars and rocket ships as the federal government picks up the pieces from his DOGE tantrum. But the global ripple effect is a reminder that some of the damage can't be undone. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
Epoch Times
28-05-2025
- Business
- Epoch Times
Trump, Johnson Respond to Elon Musk Objecting to ‘Big, Beautiful Bill'
The White House and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) responded on May 28 to Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) leader Elon Musk objecting to the major reconciliation bill that the congressional GOP is looking to send to President Donald Trump's desk. Musk told 'CBS Sunday Morning' in an episode airing on June 1: 'I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decreases it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing.' 'I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful , but I don't know if it can be both.' Trump said that the bill will 'need a lot of votes' and that he is 'not happy about certain aspects of it, but I'm thrilled by other aspects of it.' He said that Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune have 'done an incredible job.' In Johnson said the House will codify the cuts that have been made based on recommendations by DOGE. 'The House is eager and ready to act on DOGE's findings so we can deliver even more cuts to big government that President Trump wants and the American people demand,' he said. Johnson said that the House will codify the DOGE-recommended cuts when the White House sends a package of spending that should be rescinded. He also said that the 'House will use the appropriations process to swiftly implement President Trump's 2026 budget.' 'In the meantime, we have been working around the clock as we prepared for those processes. The House made sure to build on DOGE's success within the One Big Beautiful Bill,' he added. Johnson also said that the reconciliation bill deals with mandatory spending, such as Medicaid, while the cuts DOGE has recommended are to discretionary funds. The bill, which the House passed on May 22 and is pending before the Senate, consists of making the 2017 tax cuts permanent, instituting no taxes on tips and overtime, and includes provisions related to American energy and immigration—such as curbing illegal entries and finishing Trump's wall along the southern border. The Senate is expected to make changes to the bill. Johnson also shared Trump added that there was 'no time to waste' and urged Senate lawmakers to get to work immediately and send the bill to his desk as soon as possible. At the same time, the Congressional Budget Office has A separate Last week, Musk Related Stories 5/27/2025 5/23/2025 'Back to spending 24/7 at work and sleeping in conference/server/factory rooms,' Musk wrote on X. 'I must be super focused on X/xAI and Tesla, as we have critical technologies rolling out.'
Epoch Times
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
Trump's First 100 Days: Under-the-Radar Executive Orders, DOGE Cuts, and Judicial Clashes
President Donald Trump's second term has reached its 100-day milestone. Jacob takes us through the highlights, including some of the lesser-known executive orders. Nathan bumped into the 'DOGE kids.' But he can't talk about them, so he'll tell us where the largest DOGE-recommended cuts have been so far. Sam examines how the administration is seeking to hold state and local officials accountable for not cooperating with federal authorities. The discussion takes us to the first 100 days of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, which offers an interesting take on the current president. Reports Covered: Trump's First 100 Days: A Rapid and Consequential Start ( ) Federal Government Sues Rochester Over 'Sanctuary' City Policies ( ) Deportation Cases Spark Debate About Role of Judiciary in Foreign Affairs ( ) Trump Signs Order Targeting Sanctuary Cities ( Related Stories 4/29/2025 4/26/2025 If you'd like to support our independent journalism, give us a 5-star rating on your favorite podcast platform.
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Impeach the judges: Trump has to take the nuclear option to save US democracy
'If ANY judge ANYWHERE can block EVERY Presidential order EVERYWHERE, we do NOT have democracy, we have TYRANNY of the JUDICIARY,' posted a clearly frustrated Elon Musk on his X platform in late February. Musk appeared to be reacting to multiple US federal court rulings that have since reversed or put on hold the DOGE-recommended sacking of federal employees, the cancellation of federal grant payments, and even the mere review of federal spending by constitutionally appointed members of President Donald Trump's new administration. Additional rulings by US federal judges have reversed or stayed the deportation of illegal immigrants identified as violent criminals belonging to gangs with which Trump has said America is at war. In one controversial case, US federal judge James Boasberg, who sits in Washington as Chief Judge of the District Court for the District of Columbia, ordered that aircraft carrying illegal immigrant gang suspects to detention in El Salvador to turn around in mid-air, possibly over international waters where he has no jurisdiction. As of last week, the Trump administration has suffered 46 adverse rulings out of 67 filings to block his executive actions. Joe Biden, in contrast, faced only 14 nationwide adverse rulings in the entire four years of his presidency. Abroad, judicial action has targeted populist leaders or parties in countries ranging from Brazil and Romania to France. On Monday Marine Le Pen, leader of the largest party in the French parliament and favoured to win the country's presidency in 2027, was judicially barred from running for public office for the next five years. Trump is no stranger to these 'lawfare' tactics. He was prosecuted in two impeachment cases in his first term and, while running for re-election, prosecuted in four criminal cases launched either by Biden's Justice Department or by local Democratic prosecutors. Now back in office, Trump faces renewed lawfare, the only means of official resistance left to a desperate Democratic opposition. Even as Trump denounces judges like Boasberg, whom he has called a 'radical Left lunatic', he has said he will follow the courts. This means that any of America's 677 district court judges can reverse or suspend his initiatives at will and with national effect. Some have already done so as 'emergency' measures in rulings that the Trump administration must appeal to higher-level circuit courts and, if unsuccessful, to the Supreme Court. Republican-appointed justices hold a 6-3 Supreme Court majority, though some occasionally side against Trump. As a branch of government, the judiciary is empowered to interpret laws but not make them. Over time, however, it has clearly become prone to overreach and abuse. Presidents can appoint jurists expected to follow ideological dictates rather than objective legal interpretations. Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer recently boasted that his party installed 235 'progressive' judges – more than one-third of the total – who are 'ruling against Trump time after time after time'. Even when controlled by the opposing party, the Senate, which must confirm federal judges, rarely votes down nominated candidates. Plaintiffs seeking a partisan ruling can 'forum shop', or file lawsuits in districts where they believe it more likely that an ideologically sympathetic judge will be assigned to their case. A considerable number of the lawsuits filed against the second Trump administration so far have been filed in Washington, where the judges and, potentially, juries, are thought to skew dramatically to the Left. In view of recent cases, there appears to be no limit on the scope of a judge's actions if the other branches of government take no corrective action. The appeals process can take months or years, sometimes so long that the root issue becomes moot before any final decision is reached. In 2024, public opinion polls registered that a majority of Americans no longer have confidence in the judiciary. Judges can only be removed by impeachment proceedings. As in presidential impeachments, removal from office for a federal judge requires a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate, a threshold so high that only 15 judges (at all levels) have ever been impeached, with just eight removed from office. Nevertheless, impeachment is surely a valid option for Trump, particularly against judges who are seen to usurp his constitutional prerogatives. Recall that the Democrats assiduously impeached Trump twice, both times knowing full well that they did not have the votes to remove him from office or deny him future office. As would be the case with overstepping judges, the process alone is the punishment: exhausting, expensive, nerve-wracking, discrediting, and dissuasive to others. Some Republicans have introduced impeachment resolutions in the House of Representatives. For now, however, the House leadership seems to prefer legislation to curtail judicial power by statute, a method used in other countries with overweening judiciaries. But that may take too long or, given the narrow Republican House majority, not pass at all. If Trump wants to fulfill his promise to save America, he may come to realise that impeaching the judges may be the only answer. Paul du Quenoy is a historian and president of the Palm Beach Freedom Institute Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
01-04-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Impeach the judges: Trump has to take the nuclear option to save US democracy
'If ANY judge ANYWHERE can block EVERY Presidential order EVERYWHERE, we do NOT have democracy, we have TYRANNY of the JUDICIARY,' posted a clearly frustrated Elon Musk on his X platform in late February. Musk appeared to be reacting to multiple US federal court rulings that have since reversed or put on hold the DOGE-recommended sacking of federal employees, the cancellation of federal grant payments, and even the mere review of federal spending by constitutionally appointed members of President Donald Trump's new administration. Additional rulings by US federal judges have reversed or stayed the deportation of illegal immigrants identified as violent criminals belonging to gangs with which Trump has said America is at war. In one controversial case, US federal judge James Boasberg, who sits in Washington as Chief Judge of the District Court for the District of Columbia, ordered that aircraft carrying illegal immigrant gang suspects to detention in El Salvador to turn around in mid-air, possibly over international waters where he has no jurisdiction. As of last week, the Trump administration has suffered 46 adverse rulings out of 67 filings to block his executive actions. Joe Biden, in contrast, faced only 14 nationwide adverse rulings in the entire four years of his presidency. Abroad, judicial action has targeted populist leaders or parties in countries ranging from Brazil and Romania to France. On Monday Marine Le Pen, leader of the largest party in the French parliament and favoured to win the country's presidency in 2027, was judicially barred from running for public office for the next five years. Trump is no stranger to these 'lawfare' tactics. He was prosecuted in two impeachment cases in his first term and, while running for re-election, prosecuted in four criminal cases launched either by Biden's Justice Department or by local Democratic prosecutors. Now back in office, Trump faces renewed lawfare, the only means of official resistance left to a desperate Democratic opposition. Even as Trump denounces judges like Boasberg, whom he has called a 'radical Left lunatic', he has said he will follow the courts. This means that any of America's 677 district court judges can reverse or suspend his initiatives at will and with national effect. Some have already done so as 'emergency' measures in rulings that the Trump administration must appeal to higher-level circuit courts and, if unsuccessful, to the Supreme Court. Republican-appointed justices hold a 6-3 Supreme Court majority, though some occasionally side against Trump. As a branch of government, the judiciary is empowered to interpret laws but not make them. Over time, however, it has clearly become prone to overreach and abuse. Presidents can appoint jurists expected to follow ideological dictates rather than objective legal interpretations. Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer recently boasted that his party installed 235 'progressive' judges – more than one-third of the total – who are 'ruling against Trump time after time after time'. Even when controlled by the opposing party, the Senate, which must confirm federal judges, rarely votes down nominated candidates. Plaintiffs seeking a partisan ruling can 'forum shop', or file lawsuits in districts where they believe it more likely that an ideologically sympathetic judge will be assigned to their case. A considerable number of the lawsuits filed against the second Trump administration so far have been filed in Washington, where the judges and, potentially, juries, are thought to skew dramatically to the Left. In view of recent cases, there appears to be no limit on the scope of a judge's actions if the other branches of government take no corrective action. The appeals process can take months or years, sometimes so long that the root issue becomes moot before any final decision is reached. In 2024, public opinion polls registered that a majority of Americans no longer have confidence in the judiciary. Judges can only be removed by impeachment proceedings. As in presidential impeachments, removal from office for a federal judge requires a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate, a threshold so high that only 15 judges (at all levels) have ever been impeached, with just eight removed from office. Nevertheless, impeachment is surely a valid option for Trump, particularly against judges who are seen to usurp his constitutional prerogatives. Recall that the Democrats assiduously impeached Trump twice, both times knowing full well that they did not have the votes to remove him from office or deny him future office. As would be the case with overstepping judges, the process alone is the punishment: exhausting, expensive, nerve-wracking, discrediting, and dissuasive to others. Some Republicans have introduced impeachment resolutions in the House of Representatives. For now, however, the House leadership seems to prefer legislation to curtail judicial power by statute, a method used in other countries with overweening judiciaries. But that may take too long or, given the narrow Republican House majority, not pass at all. If Trump wants to fulfill his promise to save America, he may come to realise that impeaching the judges may be the only answer.
