Elon Musk Might Just Know What He’s Doing, But Will the Nation Tolerate the Necessary Pain?

 

 

By Wahab Raofi

Summary: Elon Musk’s efforts to bring private-sector efficiency to government operations is a compelling idea, and he could succeed if he takes a more precise, scalpel-like approach to trim unnecessary spending without jeopardizing essential functions of government. His approach has faced resistance from bureaucrats and government agencies alike.

Appointed by President Trump to streamline the government, Elon Musk has been tasked with cutting wasteful spending and preventing fraud. On its face, it seems a laudable plan, but his efforts have opened significant cracks. One notable example occurred during a cabinet meeting with President Trump and about 20 others, when Secretary of State Marco Rubio expressed frustration, accusing Musk of overstepping his bounds.

According to The NewYork Times, Rubio had been privately critical of Musk for weeks, especially after Musk's team effectively shuttered an entire agency under Rubio's purview: the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

This pushback isn’t coming only from within the bureaucracy. Members of Congress have also opposed Musk’s plans. Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, a Democrat, voiced concerns about the influence of billionaires like Musk, saying, “It’s an easy story. Elon Musk and the billionaires have taken over government to steal from the American people to enrich themselves.”

Even some Republicans, who traditionally support a leaner government, oppose cuts when they affect their own constituencies. For example, Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia expressed concern over potential job losses in her state, which would have significant political implications.

In another example, the Trump administration considered reducing the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) workforce by 80,000 employees, which sparked some panic among GOP lawmakers. Senate Veterans' Affairs Chair Jerry Moran and other Republicans emphasized the need for careful, responsible downsizing, urging consultations with Congress before any decisions were made. Similarly, Senate Majority Leader John Thune raised concerns about the potential negative impact on veterans and their families.

This situation harkens to an analogy from a high school textbook: A man asks a tattoo artist to ink a tiger on his arm. However, as the needle touches his skin, the pain becomes unbearable. "Which part are you drawing?" the man asks. "The eyes," replies the artist. "Leave out the eyes," the man says. As the pain intensifies, he asks the artist to skip more parts of the tattoo. Frustrated, the artist finally says, "I've never seen a tiger without ears and a tail."

In simple terms, it can’t be done without a certain amount of pain.

Americans desire a lean, corruption-free and efficient government, but they don’t want to feel the pain of the necessary changes. Achieving this goal is not without sacrifice, especially considering the U.S. federal deficit. In fiscal year 2024, the federal government spent $6.75 trillion while collecting only $4.92 trillion in revenue, resulting in a $1.83 trillion deficit.

This gap between spending and revenue underscores the tough choices that must be made to create a sustainable government.

Some question whether Elon Musk has any legal right to streamline the government, and the answer seems to be yes. While Musk may not be a publicly elected official, his expertise and experience in managing billion-dollar ventures could make him an asset to the government, despite public skepticism. A Pew survey in January and February showed that 54 percent of Americans view Musk unfavorably, largely due to his perceived cocky demeanor and unconventional style. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that Musk has demonstrated exceptional success in the private sector, and now he is attempting to apply that expertise to government reform.

Musk’s role is simply to carry out the task to which he was appointed: reduce waste and inefficiency. The resistance to his efforts is driven by the typical "Not in my backyard" mentality.

Government agencies can’t expect to be exempt from scrutiny or reform simply because they are comfortable with the status quo. Musk’s business-oriented approach may not fit seamlessly with the slow-moving processes of government, but if the American people want a lean, efficient government, this transformation will inevitably involve some discomfort.

Passing the burden of the deficit to future generations is not a solution, and Musk's willingness to take bold action, as Trump advised, may be the only way to address the deep inefficiencies plaguing government operations. While change is often met with resistance, the long-term benefits of a more efficient government could outweigh the short-term pain.

 

#