Elon Musk's Department of Government Inefficiency
Firing essential workers who need to then be rehired. Distracting agencies with directives that are reversed and then reversed again. Forcing workers back into offices where they don't have enough desks. And provoking countless agency meetings where managers are unable to answer basic questions about the White House's latest move. On and on it goes.
'The meetings are as clear as mud,' said Sheria Smith, a civil rights attorney at the Department of Education in Texas and president of the American Federation of Government Employees Local 252. 'No one knows anything. … People are being released from duty, then returned to duty. We don't know who's calling the shots. It's just wildly inefficient.'
She added, 'How can you be on task when you don't even know from hour to hour whether you're going to [have a job]?'
President Donald Trump vowed on the campaign trail to fire a lot of people and shrink the federal workforce, which numbers around 2.4 million, excluding the U.S. Postal Service. So far the administration has terminated thousands of people through legally dubious layoffs and tried to push out tens of thousands more through the also legally dubious deferred resignation program known as 'Fork in the Road.'
In more than a dozen interviews, federal workers described lost hours and days as they tried to navigate an endless stream of unclear guidance as their jobs hang in the balance. Most of them spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of being fired or retaliated against.
A mental health provider at the Department of Veterans Affairs said in the wake of the 'Fork' proposal they'd had four impromptu staff meetings, each up to a half-hour long, 'pulling us away from veteran care.'
'In response to Saturday's 'what did you do last week?' email, leadership scheduled yet another meeting first thing Monday morning — forcing me to reschedule a veteran's appointment just to receive guidance from my leadership on how to respond,' they said.
Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, should instead be called a department of 'inefficiency or ineptitude,' said Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service, a nonprofit organization that advocates for a more effective federal government.
'They have caused unbelievable waste, unbelievable distraction from the mission, unbelievable loss of critical talent,' Stier said. 'They've done nothing to understand the systems they're trying to change or learn from those around them who know better.'
He added, 'The federal government isn't, in fact, a tech startup.'
Much of the wasted time stems from the White House's hostile and confusing directives.
Some of the most critical information isn't coming from federal agency leaders — it's coming from the previously obscure Office of Personnel Management, and from Musk, the unelected head of a not-real federal agency. (Trump has formally renamed the U.S. Digital Service the U.S. DOGE Service, but DOGE is better understood as a White House government-cutting initiative.)
Late last week, more than 2 million workers received an email from OPM instructing them to reply with a list of five bullet points explaining what they'd accomplished during the previous week. The insulting demand was paired with a threat from Musk on X, his private social-media platform formerly known as Twitter, where he said a failure to reply would be considered 'a resignation.'
Workers, union representatives and agency managers spent the weekend trying to figure out whether people actually needed to respond. Many employees got little done on Monday as unscheduled meetings were called and agency heads gave conflicting guidance on what to do.
OPM later said replying to Musk's demand was voluntary, suggesting there would be no repercussions for ignoring it. But Trump contradicted that guidance by saying those who didn't reply would be 'fired' or 'sort of semi-fired.'
Such chaos ends up having a real-world impact, said an employee of the Veterans Benefits Administration who processes disability claims. The worker receives a daily report on her productivity rate, which is based on the number of claims processed and their complexity, and she saw a roughly 20% drop on Monday as she and others were dealing with the Musk ultimatum.
In other words, veterans with disabilities stemming from their service to the country were waiting longer to have their claims processed because of confusing threats from the White House.
'People are stressed out, and that's going to get in the way,' she explained. 'We have to focus. These claims are very complex. It requires a lot of attention. We're definitely being taken away from the focus we should be putting on the veterans.'
Another VA worker said their superiors had been 'mired in daily meetings to discuss what little information we had, how it was affecting employees and overall morale, and addressing whether or not any of this is legal.'
'To estimate time loss over the course of one week, I'd say it cost us at least a full day's productivity, if not more,' they said.
Nothing may be more wasteful than firing workers who must then be rehired. After the Trump administration's sloppy firing of probationary employees, agencies had to try to hastily reinstate workers who oversee nuclear weapons, manage the power grid and fight bird flu.
Among them were more than two dozen workers at the Bonneville Power Administration, a federal power supplier in the Pacific Northwest managed under the Energy Department.
Mike Braden, a Bonneville Power Administration employee and president of its employee union, said that by the time the workers were rehired they had already lost their access to the IT systems and their clearance to enter buildings. The advice from management upon their return was to 'pretend like nothing happened.'
'There's no thought to this, no coordination with the agencies,' Braden said of the White House. 'We have all this disruption, and we can't figure out how things are going to work moving forward.'
He said his phone is buzzing nonstop with questions from members about emails or memos from OPM or posts online from Musk.
'I'm getting hit up all through the weekend, all throughout the evening,' he said. 'Somebody will ping me, 'Hey I just saw this — what does this mean?' I'm like, 'Aw shit.''
Paul Dobias, a Department of Navy engineer and president of his union, said agency managers are so afraid of appearing hostile to the Trump administration's goals that they seem to pass along guidance without review. Many of those managers, he noted, could lose their civil service protections under Trump's Schedule F scheme.
'It just goes right through their doors where nobody takes the time to go and sit down and figure out, ′Does this all add up and make sense?′' Dobias said. 'I've seen a number of documents where it [appears] there's like five or six different people generating the documents … and they're not talking with each other.'
The turbulence has created an enormous amount of work for federal employees who also are union representatives and help enforce collective bargaining agreements. Coworkers are coming to them more than ever for clarity — and in many cases managers are steering them to the union representatives because the managers themselves don't have answers.
Smith, the union president at the Education Department, said supervisors seem to be at a loss when they're peppered with questions in online staff meetings about the administration's latest directive. She said she's heard a variation of one particular nonanswer more than once.
'They'll say, 'We all got the same email,'' Smith said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Says 30% Tariff Is Coming To European, Mexican-Made Cars On August 1
Good morning! It's Monday, July 14, 2025, and this is The Morning Shift, your daily roundup of the top automotive headlines from around the world, in one place. This is where you'll find the most important stories that are shaping the way Americans drive and get around. In this morning's edition, Trump sets a new date for tariffs against vehicles made in the EU and Mexico, Elon Musk says he doesn't want Tesla and xAI to merge, GM idles its truck plant in Mexico, and Land Rover recalls thousands of Range Rover Evoques for an airbag issue. Read more: Popular Cars Consumer Reports Recommends You Skip In Favor Of Something Better 1st Gear: New Tariffs Are Coming To The EU, Mexico If you were tired of hearing about tariffs, then I've got some bad news for you. President Trump just unveiled his latest round of tariff ultimatum, setting a 30% duty on things made in Mexico and the European Union. He sees to be going with the "never let 'em know your next move" method of haphazard negotiation. The President announced the changes in two letters posted on social media over the weekend. He informed some very important trade partners that the new rates would kick in on August 1 if they could not negotiate better terms. His past few weeks have been split between this confusing (and expensive) shuffling of tariffs and dodging questions about Jeffrey Epstein. These latest levels are tweaked from the tariff levels he proposed in April. From Automotive News: The EU had been hoping to conclude a tentative deal with the U.S. to stave off higher tariffs, but Trump's letter punctured the recent optimism in Brussels over the prospects for an 11th-hour agreement between the major economies. Trump did, however, leave an opening for additional adjustments. "If you wish to open your heretofore closed Trading Market to the United States, and eliminate your Tariff, and Non-Tariff, Policy and Trade Barriers, we will, perhaps, consider an adjustment to this letter," Trump wrote. The tariff rates would apply widely, though separate from the president's sectoral tariffs on products such as automobiles and steel. If implemented, it could place the EU at a competitive disadvantage on American exports to the neighboring U.K., which left the bloc in 2020 and was the first country to come to a top-line trade pact with Trump. Germany's VDA auto association tells AutoNews that there is still no solution to easing the current 27.5% duty on cars imported from the EU to the U.S. At the same time, European automakers are still holding out hope (such a silly move) that the two entities can reach some sort of agreement to lower auto import tariffs, potentially including a so-called "netting mechanism" to offset imports with exports. Something like this could be based on the value of exports out of the U.S. market, rather than the number of exported vehicles. In Mexico, Trump wants President Claudia Sheinbaum to continue supporting the securing of the border between the two North American countries. Trump added that if Mexico "is successful in challenging the cartels and stopping the flow of Fentanyl," the U.S. would consider adjusting the levies. "These tariffs may be modified, upward or downward, depending on our relationship with your country," he added. The letter is silent on whether the U.S. will preserve a carve-out for goods traded under the USMCA trade deal, which have been exempt from the current 25 percent rate. The administration has previously said it will keep the exemption for Canada. Other countries Trump has pointed to for tariff hikes in recent days include South Korea, South Africa, Indonesia, Thailand, and Cambodia, as well as Algeria, Libya, Iraq, and Sri Lanka. What is bro doing? 2nd Gear: Musk Doesn't Want Tesla, xAI To Merge Tesla CEO Elon Musk says he does not support a merger between the automaker and his artificial intelligence start-up, xAI, which owns the Grok chatbot that has been having some major issues with racism, sexism, homophobia, and antisemitism lately. This news comes after Musk announced that Grok was on its way to being implemented in Tesla vehicles, something I've got no doubt would go totally smoothly. From Reuters: In response to a user post on X that asked Tesla investors if they supported a merger between the two companies, Musk replied "No." On Sunday, Musk had said he would ask Tesla shareholders to vote whether Tesla can invest in xAI, after earlier saying "it would be great" if Tesla could do so. [...] xAI acquired X, formerly called Twitter and also owned by Musk, in a $33 billion deal in March this year, valuing the combined group at $80 billion at the time. Sources told Reuters in June that xAI had been in talks to raise money at a valuation of more than $120 billion, while a valuation of as high as $200 billion was also discussed. The Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday that Musk's SpaceX had committed $2 billion to xAI as part of a $5 billion equity round. The way Elon's companies invest in each other sort of makes me feel like rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic. It's quite the masterful gambit by Musk. 3rd Gear: GM Idles Mexican Plant General Motors says it is idling production at a pickup truck plant in Silao, Mexico — where it builds the Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra — for several weeks. The plant was down for the first two weeks of July, and it's scheduled to be idled again the weeks of August 4 and August 11. From Automotive News: "Scheduled down weeks at GM Silao are part of a standard operating process focused on optimizing production at our manufacturing complex," GM said in response to a Reuters inquiry. The Silverado and mechanically similar Sierra are by far GM's top sellers in the U.S., and major profit generators. GM also builds the Silverado and Sierra at factories in Fort Wayne, Ind., Flint, Mich. and Ontario, Canada. It is common for automakers to halt factory work to perform maintenance or adjust assembly lines for model changes. Most of GM's U.S. factories were not operating last week as part of a usual down week for the July 4 holiday. Trucks like the Sierra and Silverado — among some of the best-selling vehicles in America — are absolutely crucial for GM. The automaker sold 278,599 Silverados and 166,409 Sierras in the first half of 2025. Those numbers represent a 2% and 12% respective increase in sales over the same period in 2024. Any downtime seems sure to hurt sales efforts. 4th Gear: Thousnds Of Range Rover Evoques Recalled For Airbag Issue Jaguar Land Rover -- which recently resumed shipping vehicles to the U.S. -- is recalling U.S.-market Range Rover Evoques built between 2021 and 2025 because the front passenger airbag could tear during deployment. Obviously, that's not ideal, and it could lead to a further risk of injury in a crash if the hot gases inside the bag escape. From AutoEvolution: [T]he airbag module in question is produced by the Hungarian arm of Joyson Safety Systems. [...] Jaguar Land Rover started looking into this matter in May 2023, following a number of reports from the manufacturer of the fascia assembly over abnormal front passenger airbag deployments. After many analyses and much investigation, the British automaker concluded in June 2025 that the airbag material showed variability in the folds of suspect airbags. The Recall Determination Committee ultimately decided on a safety recall on June 30, 2025. Thankfully for both customers and JLR's legal team, Jaguar Land Rover is not aware of any reported injuries resulting from this concern. The recall documentation filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not explicitly state how the supplier corrected this condition in airbag production or if the remedy modules come from a different supplier. Owners and lessees will have the possibly faulty airbag modules replaced at Land Rover dealerships, who will be informed no later than July 21. Owners can expect to be notified by mail on or before August 25. In total, 20,999 Evoques are being recalled, according to Reuters. Reverse: Built Ford Tough We really don't talk enough about how wild it is that ol' Gerry Ford was able to become the freaking President without receiving a single vote. The man was just built different. If you want to learn more about our 38th President (and the second who shared a name with a car brand), head over to On The Radio: Cobra Starship - Good Girls Go Bad Feat. Leighton Meester There's no better song in the world for hanging in the corner with your five best friends and jamming out. Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox... Read the original article on Jalopnik.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
McCarthy swipes at Gaetz, says Musk third party would only help Democrats
Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) opened his remarks Wednesday at the Hill Nation Summit by saying that postcongressional life was 'fabulous. We don't have Matt Gaetz anymore.' The remark from McCarthy, who has had a long-running feud with former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), drew laughter from the audience. 'The party is so much stronger now,' McCarthy added, comparing President Trump to former President Reagan for having 'transformed where America is in this world.' Gaetz is now retired from Congress after he was initially nominated to serve as attorney general for the Trump administration. The nomination was pulled after it became clear that Gaetz did not have the support to win confirmation. McCarthy separately commented on the breakup between Trump and tech mogul Elon Musk, calling it unfortunate. 'Elon is extremely bright. You tell me how many of the people in the world can privately build a rocket without buying a Russian rocket and go to Earth to come back and capture it, right?' McCarty told The Hill's Emily Brooks. He also suggested it would be better for U.S. competitiveness if the two joined together again, while dismissing the idea of a third party. Trump's coalition is a 'new Republican Party' that can answer the frustrations of voters, McCarthy said. 'I understand people's frustration with things not getting solved, but now is a different opportunity,' McCarthy said. 'Trump has put a coalition together that's rather unique. Anybody else that thinks about doing some other party, I think that would only help the Democrats win an election,' he added. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


The Hill
10 hours ago
- The Hill
The real message behind Musk's America Party
America has never lacked political showmen. So when Elon Musk — a man as comfortable launching rockets as launching tweets — announces his intention to form a new political party, the instinctive response is skepticism, if not outright derision. Call it the 'America Party,' he says, a banner for those tired of both elephants and donkeys. Naturally, the memes wrote themselves. But peel away the theatrics, and something more consequential is hiding in plain sight: the yearning. Americans are not necessarily flocking to Musk's cause, but millions are scanning the horizon for something else. The spectacle may be Musk's — but the discontent it feeds on is widely shared. It is tempting to dismiss this moment as déjà vu. Third-party attempts are stitched into America's political folklore. From Theodore Roosevelt's Bull Moose insurgency to Ross Perot's data-heavy crusade, outsiders have long challenged the duopoly, only to be crushed by the machinery of incumbency. The U.S. political system, with its winner-take-all incentives and rigid party structures, has proven uniquely impervious to disruption. But today's landscape feels different — not because the rules have changed, but because the public mood has. Start with trust — once a civic virtue, now a casualty. A Pew Research survey earlier this year found that only 22 percent of Americans trust the federal government to do what is right 'just about always' or 'most of the time' — down from over 70 percent in the 1960s. Meanwhile, Gallup reports that confidence in Congress sits at around 10 percent. This isn't apathy. It's disillusionment — a broad-based sense that the current political structure no longer listens, let alone delivers. On July 3, Musk announced he formed the America Party, sparking immediate speculation about 2026 House races. A SnapPoll24 survey days later found 27 percent of Gen Z and Millennial respondents 'interested' in supporting a non-affiliated candidate in 2026 — numbers that would have been inconceivable a decade ago. Into this void steps Musk. Not with policy, not yet — but with performance. And in a media ecosystem where attention is power, that's often enough. His platform remains a cipher, but the appeal is clear: disruption without the burden of ideology. In an era when Democrats speak the lexicon of elite progressivism and Republicans oscillate between grievance and populism, Musk is offering a third lane defined not by ideas but by estrangement. Of course, the barriers to entry remain formidable. Ballot access laws, campaign finance hurdles and entrenched party loyalties conspire to keep challengers out. But technology, once the ally of incumbents, now levels the field. A candidate with a smartphone, a war chest, and a loyal digital following can bypass gatekeepers entirely. Donald Trump did it in 2016. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also built a movement with little more than a microphone and a mailing list. And the center, as they say, cannot hold. Political polarization has pushed the parties to their ideological poles, leaving a vast no-man's-land where independents, moderates and suburban voters wander unaffiliated. Recent data shows that 43 percent of Americans identify as independents. The appetite for a new voice is real. What remains elusive is whether it can be organized into a coherent political force. That's where most third-party ventures falter. They speak fluent grievance but go silent on governance. They thrive on outrage, but wither when the conversation turns to solutions. That's not a bug; it's the structure. Populism, left or right, is easiest to sell when your only goal is to sneer at the system. Governing, however, requires trade-offs — something Musk has famously disdained, whether building tunnels or tweeting policy. Still, disruption has value, even when it fails. By threatening the status quo, it can jolt legacy parties into responsiveness. Consider Emmanuel Macron in France. His upstart party dislodged a calcified system not because it was flawless, but because it was fresh. Similar stories have played out in Italy, Chile, and even Taiwan — democracies where old parties collapsed under the weight of their own complacency. The U.S., with its older institutions and more rigid rules, may prove harder to crack — but pressure matters. America's founders never envisioned permanent political parties. They built a framework — checks, balances, federalism — that could outlast any faction. That resilience is a double-edged sword. It guards against demagoguery, yes, but also cushions the sclerosis of status quo governance. Change, when it comes, is rarely elegant. But it is often catalyzed by those who seem least likely to lead it. So no, the America Party is unlikely to take Congress by storm. It may not even make it past a news cycle. But its emergence is a flare, signaling a deeper instability in the system. If Democrats and Republicans choose to ignore it, they do so at their peril. Voters are not disengaged — they're disenchanted. And if Musk's provocation forces the parties to rethink how they earn trust, rather than expect it, then even his most outlandish political experiment will have served a purpose. The challenge — and opportunity — for America's institutions is not to suppress these new voices, but to absorb their critiques and adapt. Ranked-choice voting, open primaries and campaign finance reform are not silver bullets, but they might be the scaffolding for a democracy that listens before it crumbles. It is often said that democracies renew themselves not through revolution, but through adaptation. Perhaps this is one of those moments. And perhaps it will take the world's richest man, hurling rhetorical grenades at both parties, to remind the establishment that the center of gravity is not fixed. It moves — sometimes suddenly — and often under their feet.