Skip to content

Insights

The Difference Between Cutting and Efficiency

Published on February 26, 2025

 

The Federal Government must become more efficient and sustainable – a point pragmatic lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have made for years. But cuts and efficiency are not the same thing. Those who are truly committed to government efficiency must make their voices heard in Congress, in the business community, and beyond to ensure any staffing reductions are done responsibly and strategically to reflect the values and priorities of our nation.

Eliminating these roles without a plan may have catastrophic effects on the economy and the nation. And without real action on entitlement and tax reform, these cuts will have little to no long-term impact on the deficit or the national debt.

For example, nearly half a million federal employees serve in Veterans Administration (VA) facilities alone – most well beyond the Beltway. The newest hires at the VA – most of whom are veterans themselves – were onboarded following the PACT Act in 2024. This bipartisan legislation significantly increased the efficiency of medical care at the VA, reducing the care backlog and helping returning servicemembers access the right disability and medical benefits faster. If an efficient and effective VA is no longer a priority for the nation, Congress should be the one to decide.

Another example is the U.S. Forest Service, a key frontline agency for preventing and combating forest fires and helping rural communities recover from natural disasters. Several thousand probationary employees – many of whom were recruited from the military via the Department of Defense Skillbridge and Operation Warfighter programs – received termination notices while out working on active recovery and fire prevention projects. Despite USDA’s assertion that no firefighter positions were lost, many of these employees serve as secondary firefighters, trained and ready to respond to crises like the recent California wildfires.

In the name of efficiency, DOGE has also targeted or eliminated many of the jobs created by Congress to ensure the efficient and transparent use of taxpayer funds. Government officials, like Inspectors General, serve Congress and the American people as independent watchdogs within federal agencies tasked with investigating allegations of fraud, waste, and abuse. Their roles are to maintain transparency and accountability within government operations – the very mission DOGE’s team now claims for itself without oversight or accountability.

Cuts like these will likely increase, not decrease, federal spending, while taxpayers receive less for their money.

For example, in 2023, Inspectors General uncovered over 4,000 cases of fraud, identifying taxpayer savings of $93.1 billion.

Individual taxpayers will also pay a greater share of the government’s gross receipts as the corporate audit functions at the Internal Revenue Service are eliminated, and major corporations are left to the honor system both in tax obligation and stewardship of public contracts. This places ethical business leaders at a competitive disadvantage and sets the American taxpayer up to be victimized by greater cycles of waste, fraud, and abuse.

Centrists stand ready to support true efforts to reform government, reduce unnecessary regulations, streamline operations, and reform tax and entitlement programs. Past efforts such as the Simpson-Bowles Commission of 2013, the budget summits of the early 1990s, and the tax and social security reforms of the 1980s provide excellent examples of how bipartisan reform can be achieved for true government efficiency. The growing deficit and debt of our nation requires a committed effort to deliver a truly efficient government consistent with the U.S. Constitution. At this time, there is little sign that we are heading in that direction.