
154,000 federal workers who took DOGE buyouts are being paid to go fishing, watch Dungeons and Dragons streams and hunt for new jobs
The figure, reported by the Washington Post, accounts for the tens of thousands of federal workers who accepted the government's offer as of June that allowed employees to 'retain all pay and benefits' through September 30 and voluntarily leave their jobs.
The offer, originally sent out by the Office of Personnel Management in January, came after President Donald Trump mandated in-person work requirements for the federal workforce, the size of which the Department of Government Efficiency aimed to significantly shrink.
The move has led to a rapid reduction in federal workers, two officials at the Office of Personnel Management told the Post, with the resignations accounting for nearly seven percent of the government's civilian workforce.
The Independent has reached out to the OPM and White House for comment.
'Ultimately, the deferred resignation program was not only legal, it provided over 150,000 civil servants a dignified and generous departure from the federal government,' the agency spokesperson told the Post. 'It also delivered incredible relief to the American taxpayer. No previous administration has gotten even close to saving American taxpayers this amount of money in such a short amount of time.'
Although DOGE set out to eliminate 'waste' in the federal government, some critics have argued that the buyouts were a waste of taxpayer dollars. Those who took the offer, meanwhile, have been spending the break as they please.
An Agriculture Department employee, who's been on paid leave since April, told the Post that he's spent his free time watching comedians play a Dungeons and Dragons game, improv, and crafters on YouTube. He applied to more than 130 jobs before landing one at an animal health company that offered him a salary much greater than the $61,000 salary from the government, he said.
For six weeks, his federal job and new job would overlap, meaning he'd be temporarily raking in cash from two salaries. His new role would earn him enough that his wife would be able to quit her job, he told the outlet. In the meantime, he goes fishing and dines out, all on the government's dime.
He recalled telling his wife: 'As much as I don't want to admit it, this ended up being a blessing in disguise.'
Brian Griffin, a former marketing specialist at the Agriculture Department making $132,000, had been planning to retire in December when he was given the deferred resignation offer. He's been on leave since May.
'When they are offering me full pay and benefits from May through September, you have to be kind of silly to say no to that,' Griffin told the Post.
One worker has found the new reality a bit more difficult. An Education Department employee, who makes $130,000, said she was put on administrative leave — a move that has left her reeling.
'My work is my whole identity,' said the employee, speaking on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation. 'I'm also sensitive to the fact that the American public would say, 'What are you crying about? You're getting paid.''
The government has so far paid her $65,000 not to work, while she has also accrued three weeks of vacation time since being put on leave. Some of her free time is dedicated to swimming and doing yoga but for most of it, she's frustrated.
'I will sometimes wake up and say, 'Why do I get out of bed today?'' she told the outlet.
Aside from the emotional effects the cuts had on many government employees, the American taxpayer could also be affected by DOGE's workforce reductions.
An analysis by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington last week, which looked at a few of the agencies impacted, found that DOGE's workforce slashes could result in a loss of over $10 billion in U.S.-based economic activity and the closure of programs that have put over $26 billion in funds back into the pockets of taxpayers.
A minority staff report from the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations Thursday also revealed that DOGE generated an estimated $21 billion in waste on mass layoffs and terminations. That figure included $14.8 billion for the deferred resignation program.
'This report is a searing indictment of DOGE's false claims. At the very same time that the Trump Administration is cutting health care, nutrition assistance, and emergency services in the name of 'efficiency' and 'savings,' they have enabled DOGE's reckless waste of at least $21.7 billion dollars,' Blumenthal, the subcommittee's ranking member, said in a statement to the Post.
'As my PSI investigation has shown, DOGE was clearly never about efficiency or saving the American taxpayer money.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
25 minutes ago
- Reuters
Boeing's St. Louis union workers reject latest offer and will strike on Monday
Aug 3 (Reuters) - Unionized workers who assemble Boeing's (BA.N), opens new tab fighter jets in the St. Louis area rejected Boeing's latest offer on Sunday and will strike at midnight on Monday, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers union said.

The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump dubbed himself the ‘father of IVF' on the campaign trail. But his pledge to mandate insurance cover has disappeared
Donald Trump's vow to expand in vitro fertilization (IVF) access to millions of Americans is on hold, with White House officials backing away from plans to require Obamacare health plans to include the service as an essential health benefit, the Washington Post reported on Sunday. The Post reported that White House officials have privately moved away from the prospect of pushing for legislation to address the issue despite it being one of Trump's signature campaign promises, citing two persons with knowledge of internal discussions in Trumpworld. A senior administration official also acknowledged to the newspaper that changing Obamacare to force insurers to cover new services would require congressional action, not an executive order. The president has governed largely by executive fiat in his second term as he grapples with a closely-divded Congress and an unruly GOP majority in the House of Representatives. He's used those executive orders to dismantle whole parts of the federal government, including USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The president even tried to take an axe to the Department of Education, though that battle is still being waged in the courts. The Supreme Court recently cleared the way for Trump to cut roughly a quarter of the agency's staff. But many of Trump's campaign promises lie outside of his ability to influence via the hiring or firing of people and redirection of agency resources or agendas. In 2024, he laid out no direct path for his goal to expand IVF access, only telling voters that insurance companies would be forced to cover it. Still, he proclaimed himself the 'father of IVF' at at Fox News town hall, and promised during an NBC News interview: 'We are going to be, under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment. We're going to be mandating that the insurance company pay.' At the time, there was little to no acknowledgment of the fact that many if not most conservatives still oppose the Affordable Care Act and the same healthcare exchanges which Trump was now promising to utilize as he sought to use the power of the federal government to expand healthcare coverage. Now, with the passage of Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' without any provisions expanding IVF access, and with the prospect of further policy gains before the midterms growing dimmer, it's unclear when the White House would have another chance to press the issue in Congress. In February, the president signed an executive order directing his advisers to 'submit to the President a list of policy recommendations on protecting IVF access and aggressively reducing out-of-pocket and health plan costs for IVF treatment.' It's been crickets on the issue since then. In 2024, many of Trump's critics and the media pointed out that the policy would essentially amount to a reversal or at the very least coming in sharp contrast to the first Trump administration's efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which ended in failure, and a contradiction of the conservative view that government should not exercise that level of control over Americans' health care decisions. The president's promise thrilled his party's natalists, embodied by Vice President JD Vance and an army of right-wing immigration hawks who fear the changing American demographics brought on as a result of falling birth rates and high levels of migration. It also wowed some of his Democratic and left-leaning critics, who see the policy as a means of furthering their goal of expanding access to healthcare for poorer Americans. For Vance, the issue of declining U.S. birth rates predates his MAGA heel-turn. In 2019, he told a gathering of conservatives in Washington: 'Our people aren't having enough children to replace themselves. That should bother us.' 'We want babies not just because they are economically useful. We want more babies because children are good. And we believe children are good, because we are not sociopaths,' the future vice president added at the time. Two years later, he'd tell a right-leaning podcast: 'I think we have to go to war against the anti-child ideology that exists in our country.' During the 2024 campaign, those views emerged again as Vance attacked Democrats as 'childless cat ladies' and leaned heavily into attacking the left for supposedly being anti-family. Progressives fought back, pointing to efforts to expand the child tax credit and other benefits that aid young families under Joe Biden and other Democratic administrations, including the passage of Barack Obama's signature law: the Affordable Care Act.


The Guardian
27 minutes ago
- The Guardian
White House officials rush to defend Trump after shaky economic week
Donald Trump administration officials fanned out on Sunday's US political shows to defend the president's policies after a bruising week of poor economic, trade and employment numbers that culminated with the firing of labor statistics chief Erika McEntarfer. US trade representative Jamieson Greer said Trump has 'real concerns' about the jobs numbers that extend beyond Friday's report that showed the national economy added 73,000 jobs in July, far below expectations. Job growth numbers were revised down by 285,000 for the two previous months as well. On CBS News's Face the Nation, Greer defended Trump's decision to fire McEntarfer, a respected statistician, saying: 'You want to be able to have somewhat reliable numbers. There are always revisions, but sometimes you see these revisions go in really extreme ways.' He added: 'The president is the president. He can choose who works in the executive branch.' But William Beach, who served as Trump's commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in his first presidency, warned that McEntarfer's dismissal would undermine confidence in the quality of US economic data. The BLS gave no reason for the revised data but noted that 'monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors'. 'This is damaging,' Beach said on Sunday on CNN's State of the Union. 'I don't know that there's any grounds at all for this firing. 'And it really hurts the statistical system. It undermines credibility in BLS.' McEntarfer on Friday published a statement on social media reacting to her dismissal, calling it the 'honor my life' to have served as BLS commissioner. She said the BLS employs 'many dedicated civil servants tasked with measuring a vast and dynamic economy'. 'It is vital and important work, and I thank them for their service to this nation,' McEntarfer's statement on the Bluesky platform said. Uproar over McEntarfer's firing has come as a series of new tariff rates are due to come into effect this month. While the president has predicted a golden age for the US economy, many economists warn that higher import tariffs could ultimately weaken American economic activity. On CBS, Greer said that Trump's tariff rates are 'pretty much set' and unlikely to be re-negotiated before they come into effect. The first six months of Trump's second terms have been characterized by a seesawing of tariff rate announcements that earned the president the moniker on Wall Street of Taco – 'Trump always chickens out'. But last week he issued an executive order outlining tariff modifications for dozens of countries after he had twice delayed implementation. Yet Greer also said many of the tariff rates announced 'are set rates pursuant to deals'. 'Some of these deals are announced, some are not, others depend on the level of the trade deficit or surplus we may have with the country,' he said. On NBC's Meet the Press, the national economic council (NEC) director, Kevin Hassett, said modified US tariff rates were now 'more or less locked in, although there will have to be some dancing around the edges about exactly what we mean when we do this or that'. Asked if tariff rates could change again, he said, 'I would rule it out because these are the final deals.' On Fox News Sunday, Hassett said he also supported McEntarfer's dismissal. 'I think what we need is a fresh set of eyes at the BLS, somebody who can clean this thing up,' he remarked. But former treasury secretary Larry Summers told ABC's This Week that McEntarfer's firing was 'way beyond anything that Richard Nixon ever did', alluding to the late former president who resigned in 1974 over the Watergate scandal. Summers said Trump's claim that the poor job numbers were 'phony' and designed to make him look bad 'is a preposterous charge'. 'These numbers are put together by teams of literally hundreds of people following detailed procedures that are in manuals,' Summers said. 'There's no conceivable way that the head of the BLS could have manipulated this number. The numbers are in line with what we're seeing from all kinds of private sector sources.' Summers placed McEntarfer's firing, Trump's pressure on Jerome Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, to lower interest rates, and the strong-arm tactics that the administration has aimed at universities, law firms and media institutions in the same bucket. 'This is the stuff of democracies giving way to authoritarianism,' Summers said. 'Firing statisticians goes with threatening the heads of newspapers. 'It goes with launching assaults on universities. It goes with launching assaults on law firms that defend clients that the elected boss finds uncongenial. This is really scary stuff.'