Elon Musk, Who Promised To Be 'Maximally Transparent,' Makes DOGE's Numbers Even Harder To Check
The cost-cutting initiative's calculation of "estimated savings" is mostly mysterious, and the parts we know about are riddled with errors.

"We will make mistakes," Elon Musk said at a press conference a month ago. "Some of the things that I say will be incorrect and should be corrected."
The billionaire entrepreneur, who is unofficially in charge of the federal cost-cutting initiative known as the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), was certainly right about that. News outlets have repeatedly identified embarrassing and consequential mistakes in DOGE's data on purported spending cuts, including contracts that had not been awarded yet, contracts that were not actually canceled, contracts that were terminated before Trump took office, contracts that were counted multiple times, conflation of contract caps with actual spending, the inclusion of past spending in estimates of future savings, and overvaluation of contracts, such as the notorious data entry error that transformed an $8 million Immigration and Customs Enforcement contract into an $8 billion cut.
While conceding his fallibility, Musk promised to be "as transparent as possible." Toward that end, he said, "we post our actions" on the DOGE website and X account, striving to be "maximally transparent." That characterization of DOGE's activities has proven to be less accurate.
Contrary to Musk's promise, Reason's C.J. Ciaramella notes, the Trump administration tried to shield his project from Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests by moving the U.S. DOGE Service (USDS), formerly the U.S. Digital Service, from the Office of Management and Budget, which is bound by FOIA, to a separate slot within the Executive Office of the President. As Ciaramella reported, a federal judge rejected that dodge on Monday, saying "USDS is likely covered by FOIA" and therefore must comply with public requests for information about its work.
So far, DOGE has withheld most of that information. Although the website that Musk touted currently claims $115 billion in "estimated savings," the details of that calculation remain mysterious.
The website says the total includes "asset sales, contract/lease cancellations and renegotiations, fraud and improper payment deletion, grant cancellations, interest savings, programmatic changes, regulatory savings, and workforce reductions." But the information posted on the site relates to just a couple of those categories, listing "contract terminations," "lease terminations," and "grant terminations." Together, DOGE's numbers indicate, these account for one-third of its total "estimated savings," and there is ample reason to be skeptical even of that part.
In some cases, DOGE has revised or deleted erroneous line items after journalists pointed out its mistakes. But DOGE recently made that corrective process more difficult by omitting federal identification numbers from its latest batch of canceled grants, which was posted on March 2. Those numbers, The New York Times reports, could initially be found in the corresponding source code, but DOGE "deleted this identifying information from the code later in the week."
A White House official who "asked not to be named" said DOGE is withholding the information "for security purposes." But without the identifying grant numbers, news organizations cannot verify the savings DOGE is claiming. If DOGE "is now going to fill its site with uncheckable claims," the Times notes, the "Wall of Receipts" on the site "loses its value."
DOGE's list of savings from 5,356 "contract terminations," which it says total about $20 billion, still includes links to information about the underlying contracts. That information has allowed journalists and analysts to expose errors and exaggerations. The list includes, for example, a $1.9 billion IRS tech support contract with Centennial Technologies that was terminated during the Biden administration. After the Times noted that mistake, the contract disappeared from DOGE's list, but now it is back.
On February 19, when DOGE was claiming $16.5 billion in contract savings, NPR found that the actual number, based on confirmed cancellations, was about $2 billion—88 percent less. DOGE's hyperbole was so pervasive that Manhattan Institute budget expert Jessica Riedl, in a February 28 interview with New York Times columnist David French, described its work as "government spending-cut theater," saying "most of what is claimed to be spending cuts are just accounting errors."
DOGE also lists savings from 793 "lease terminations," which it says total about $500 million. Each item includes the leasing agency, the location and size of the space, the annual lease cost, and the "total savings."
Unlike DOGE's list of purported contract savings, its list of 7,488 "grant terminations," which it says total about $17 billion, does not include information beyond the source agency (e.g., "Department of Education"), the "total contract" amount, the claimed savings, and the date the line item was "uploaded." But the Times, which copied some of the relevant source code before the identifying numbers were deleted, found mistakes that suggest the grant list suffers from the same problems as the contract list.
"At least five of the 20 largest 'savings' appeared to be exaggerated, according to federal data and interviews with the nonprofits whose grants were on the list," the Times says. In one case, DOGE claimed it had saved $1.75 billion by canceling a grant from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to "a public-health nonprofit called Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance." But "the grant had not been terminated," and USAID, in any case, "had already paid out all the money it owed." In other words, "even if the grant had been terminated, the savings would have been $0."
Needless to say, this is not what maximal transparency looks like. And DOGE's error-riddled lists, which add up to $37.5 billion in claimed savings, leave out two-thirds of the $115 billion in total "estimated savings." That means most of that calculation is impossible to check.
Part of the remaining $77.5 billion, DOGE says, comes from "workforce reductions." That makes sense in light of the Trump administration's efforts to reduce the number of federal employees through layoffs and severance offers. But it's not clear how much DOGE claims to have saved in this category.
DOGE also says it has saved money by attacking fraud and improper payments. That is a potentially worthwhile effort, since the Government Accountability Office has estimated that "the federal government could lose between $233 billion and $521 billion annually to fraud." But it is clearly not true that DOGE already has "found hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud," as President Donald Trump claimed in his speech to Congress last week.
How much fraud has DOGE actually identified? All we know is that it must be considerably less than $77.5 billion, the unitemized amount of claimed savings.
DOGE also counts "asset sales" as part of its "estimated savings." Again, the amount is unclear, and this characterization is misleading in two ways: Asset sales are a source of revenue rather than savings, and any given sale is a one-time event, meaning it cannot help bridge the gap between spending and revenue beyond a single fiscal year.
There is a more serious conceptual problem with including "regulatory savings." While lifting unnecessary burdens on businesses would certainly be welcome, the resulting private savings would not amount to a federal spending cut. We don't know how consequential that conflation is because we don't know how much of the claimed savings falls into this category.
"Programmatic changes," another component of "estimated savings," is pretty vague. But it sounds plausible, depending on the details—which, again, we don't know.
Any actual reduction in spending would help curtail borrowing, so it makes sense to include "interest savings." But that can't amount to much in the context of a $2 trillion annual budget deficit and $29 trillion in publicly held debt.
By insisting on "competence and caring," Musk thinks, he can "cut the budget deficit in half" by the time DOGE sunsets on July 4, 2026. That always seemed improbable, given that such a reduction would amount to about 63 percent of discretionary spending.
If you take DOGE's numbers at face value, it looks like Musk is well on the way to his target. But it's clear that we can't take DOGE's numbers at face value.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I, for one, am not convinced anybody on the Reason staff could comprehend the numbers if they were printed out and handed to any of you.
Whoever thought that when Javier Milei's chainsaw was taken to the sclerotic American bureaucracy, a certain ostensible libertarian magazine would be furious about it.
DOGE has been in action for just six fucking weeks and is in the middle of the biggest audit in American, or even world history, but termites like Sarcasmic and Sullum are raging that they haven't received all the comprehensive data, broken down and in triplicate from the agency yet, so they can look for the parts that show Trump is Hitler.
What utter jokes they are.
This "joke" has been going on since the infamous "Whiskey Tax".
Debating specific wasteful govt. spending is a distraction. For over a century, deficit spending has risen.
Rand Paul notes the unapologetic run-away spending of the left and the hypocrisy of the "conservative" right that also spends and blames the left.
Conclusion: The system created wars and economic disasters. It can't "fix" itself.
If you disagree, you ignore the overspending made possible since 1913 when the Federal Reserve (central bank) was created to fund WWI and the continued deficit since. Clearly, it's a destructive political paradigm.
Why do you allow yourself to be governed into poverty? Why don't you stop voting for the failed political system? Are you economically suicidal? How about your loss of life, liberty, property, happiness?
Is this citizens hurting citizens, or a despotic govt.? Do we need more violence or a new non-violent politics?
Think, decide, and act.
I'd put it at half the staff would willfully misinterpret the numbers even before they were handed to them.
We're talking about the magazine that employs Elizabeth "Sonograms detect electrical currents" Nolan Brown and Ron "With less farming we could give more ranch land back to nature" Bailey as it's The Science! reporter.
Numbers produced by knowledge-averse, out-competed, uneducated, right-wing misfits may feature idiosyncracies that are hard to comprehend to modern, bright, well-adjusted individuals.
Leftists are mentally ill. All the studies show this. Look it up yourself.
Look it up myself I will, as I wouldn't ask a para-educated culture war casualty to do the research for me.
So are you Sarc or Arty? You’ve got to be one of those two worthless faggots.
Yeah, this schtick was tired and insulting even to people who would otherwise nominally agree with him when Arty did it... and then quit.
I thought Arty got banned?
I assumed he died of an aneurysm when Trump was not assassinated, or he was one of the attempted assassins.
Fuck off and die, steaming pile of lefty shit.
Obviously your handle represents your IQ. Leftists are consistently idiots.
I did. It says right in Mein Kampf that those OTHER Socialists are Satan; only National Socialists love Jesus baked with pineapples!
It's actually the reverse.
https://www.dazeddigital.com/life-culture/article/62392/1/intelligent-people-are-more-likely-to-be-left-wing-iq-politics-says-science
True. DOGE's numbers are hard to check because they are having a hard time prying them out of the cold dead fingers of the bureaucracy. Small wonder as the corruption becomes even more clear day by day.
I've often wondered what the name "reason" is supposed to mean.
We've gone from complete blackout during the Shit-stain administration to complete transparency under Trump. So what does the author write about? The author writes about the joy of transparency which reveals warts and all.
Again, what the hell does "reason" mean?
As if anyone believes these FOIA requests are in good faith. Dems want to bury DOGE in weaponized requests to bog them down.
A FOIA request to a new, intransparent "department" operating on executive fiat and headed by someone with a major conflict of interest is 'weaponized' according to fragile, schizoid, impotently squirming, right-wing dead ends of evolution.
People get really mad when their Gods are questioned. You might make them think.
Good one. Did you hear about the Green Sharknado psientist? He tries to convince people that units of capacitance times units of resistance are units of thyme.
FOIA requests are lawfare.
They kind of are, retard. This is a deliberate bogging strategy.
Stopping the audit would suit the statists just fine.
Transparency is lawfare. Yup.
Open up your fucking ears you drunk cunt. It’s been explained to you. You just hate Trump.
Broken. Didn’t used to be…wtf happened to you?
The booze and TDS raging caught up with him.
Good one. But why so few Grey Eminence rectangles? Xitter boy's car sales are dropping like Kennedy Kool-Ade guzzlers. You'd expect the Sockpuppet LAN hice to be screeching like Muthaslammer blaming it all on Sullum. Where's Delta Force Goupie? The Woodchipmunk Trio? Trump's Elawn Jockey?
embarrassing and consequential mistakes in DOGE's data
Musk turned into a government bureaucrat pretty fast. Is it the water in the DC swamp that does that?
You guys are the most big government libertarians I've ever seen.
It's kinda like you're not even libertarian. Just.... Marxist.
Hey, you voted for the gay pedo who had no chance of winning because he checked your box, right?
Note to foreign readers: God's Own Prohibitionists struggle to evade the fact that WINNING is using leveraged, law-changing spoiler vote clout to make THEM LOSE. Replacing Jesus Nazis with libertarians will give Dems a worthy and different adversary instead of just another gang of looters.
Reason stopped being libertarians years ago.
Well, if he's got nothing to hide ...
This is funny. There was an article just a few days ago about all the budget and bureaucratic shenanigans which make such a mess out of trying to find what is actually being spent.
And now an article about how Musk hasn't straightened everything out.
Tell ya what, Jake old buddy -- I don't give a shit if Musk isn't 100% transparent. He's finding real waste and fraud, he's more transparent than the bureaucracy, and he hasn't even had two months yet. I'd say he's doing a damned sight better than anyone else in the past 100 years, and that's good enough for me.
Bill Clinton pared the federal government down to the size that it was way back when Ike was president. Got rid of 420,000 federal employees. And he did it with the help of Congress, which meant none of his cuts were met with lawsuits. Then along came Bush II and the federal government exploded. Now you're going to read that and conclude that I'm a Democrat, because Republicans will never say anything good about a Democrat.
To Clinton’s credit, he was able to read the writing on the wall when the Republicans dominated the 94 midterms and worked with them to reign in spending. (Hell, if you played clips of him without telling most people who it was, they would think he was downright MAGA for a lot of his stances/policies/rhetoric.)
Of course the DNC’s response to that was to make it harder to fire federal employees.
(I maintain that if Congress wanted a a say in hiring/firing practices of midmanagement bureaucrats, they shouldn’t have set all of these agencies up as part of the Executive Branch.)
You are such a disingenuous cunt. I think Clinton was one of our better presidents policy wise. Yes, the republican dominated congress had an impact, but I think Clinton still performed well overall. I’d have a beer with that guy. Fuck Bush 2, he was awful. Biden was worse. Trump is an improvement over Biden…can you at least admit that much? Or are you just this broken?
Except, among other things, he sold our missle technology to the ChiComs.
Maybe so, but when G Waffen Bush made people ashamed of being Texan he at least had the guts to call together a lynch mob to bully the Dixie Chicks. Any coward can be a J6er, throw bricks through congressional windows 'n such. But it takes a real man to get somebody even dumber to bully the chicks that hurt his feelings.
Is that picture AI generated? Elon looks a little dry and yet shiny at the same time.
The picture is real. The side logo in the cap says to take cyanide if surrounded. This is what Magda Quandt, ex-wife of billionaire did after ditching rich hubby to marry flawless Aryan altruist Goebbels. So as not to end up like Mussolini--and because Christian National Socialists love children--she dosed them all with cyanide before taking the Jonestown Sacrament herself. Harald, the one that got away, was a POW at the time Hitler's bunker was ransacked.
If you take DOGE's numbers at face value, it looks like Musk is well on the way to his target. But it's clear that we can't take DOGE's numbers at face value.
That's ok. R's aren't looking for savings. They're looking for votes. The superficial appearance of savings is what has delivered votes to R's for decades.
Seethe harder loser.
I would have mostly agreed with you in prior administrations. I think most R's genuinely want government to be smaller but still fall into the trap of "cutting anything that will make a difference is political suicide" as well as not wanting to cut their own pet projects, which is why we're where we are right now, barreling towards insolvency as a nation.
But you have to admit this administration is novel. Whether you think it's constitutional or not, there's no denying Trump is trying to shrink government expenditures. Whether he'll ever touch the defense budget or entitlements is another question, but I actually wouldn't be too surprised if he did.
I thought it was Fifth Column backstabbers infiltrating the Libertarian Party committees. So Kennedy, the Jesus Caucus, Trump and his E-lawn Jockey charging plug holder are the real libertarians?!
While DOGE is a good idea it has not been carried out well. It seems to be more geared to entertain rather than actually save money. I fully suspect that that like the first Trump administration the second will increase spending. DOGE keeps the people engaged while the administration picks the people's pockets.
The purpose of DOGE is to replace federal workers with people loyal to Trump, not to save money. If they wanted to save money they'd be working with the Republican majority in Congress to change the statutes that the executive executes. Mother's Lament says that they're doing that, but he hasn't provided any links. And I wouldn't trust him to tell me the time, so I assume he's lying. If they are then that's a good thing. But I really, really doubt it.
You're right about spending. I'll bet my car that he won't balance the budget, and I'll bet anyone a hundred dollars that federal spending in 2028 will be higher than it is now.
The purpose of Sarcasmic posts are to run cover for the Democrats, and bemoan the fact that the current audit and fat trimming occurring now is practical due to facing an uncooperative bureaucracy, rather than meeting the fantasy he has concocted.
You got me. The fact that I want government cuts to be done with laws that are harder to undo than executive orders means I don't want to cut government at all. The fact that my criticism of Trump's cuts is that they're going to be undone by the next Democratic administration means I support Democrats. Yup. Like totally, and stuff. Lying moron. Go suck a bag of dicks.
Have you considered that DOGE is necessary to get the public on board with cutting the government SO THAT CONGRESS IS FORCED TO PASS LEGISLATION to make permanent cuts?
Well then DOGE is doing it in the worst way possible. Their cuts are not targeted, they are seemingly irrational (wtf is up with firing people at the National Weather Service? Right before hurricane and tornado season no less?), they are riddled with errors, and they carry with them a fuckton of conflicts of interest. Who exactly are the people he is trying to persuade? The people who currently support what he is doing are going to support him no matter what he does. If you want to get the rest of the public on board you have to have a much more measured or even sane plan to all of this.
Elon is just firing anyone he can to see what goes wrong, and then hire loyalists to fill the positions he oopsied on.
Let me know when Congress gets on board. I'll celebrate.
Until then I'll be attacked for wanting to shrink a government of laws by shrinking the laws.
Lying sack of shit. Somebody please save this post so that if republican congress passes cuts and then Sarc does everything except celebrate we can continue to demonstrate his hypocrisy.
So if Congress never gets on board, we shouldn’t even try to do anything?
If Congress doesn't get on board, you elect different congressmen.
I’ve been trying!
Then you try harder. And if you keep failing, then the last thing you do is violate the separation of powers and support the President unilaterally deciding how much money to spend and on what. Unless, of course, your goal is to end up with a Congress that only exists to do the bidding of the President.
Slimy shit-piles of lefty shit are not found often other than this fuck-face:
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
Who should fuck off and die.
This is a particularly steaming pile of lefty shit:
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
Who should fuck off and die.
Have you considered that DOGE is necessary to get the public on board with cutting the government SO THAT CONGRESS IS FORCED TO PASS LEGISLATION to make permanent cuts?
We need to give the executive even more power of the purse than than it has already gotten from Congress in violation of the Constitution, so that Congress will finally want to take some of it back!
Instead of, I don't know, electing people to Congress that aren't servile weaklings that do whatever the President of their party wants?
This is a particularly slimy pile of lefty shit:
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
Who should fuck off and die.
Looks to me like your rules of inference are no match for Muthaslammer's Revealed Faith when it comes to guiding its choices and actions.
"while the administration picks the people's pockets.
Biden's Administration or Obama's? You'll have to be more specific.
The $2B to Power Forward Communities would be a really good callout don't you think?
DOGE wuz a title iv nobility, kinda like JOOK back before Global Sharknado Climate sent Venice to Davy Jones' locker. But Moosellini made Italy an th Pope iv Rome Grate Again an' th' grateful populace--tears streaming in pathridyotic gratichood 'n admirashun in their MIPRGA caps, illivated him to the title iv DUCE in 1925. Thin after the Pact of Steal with White Hitler, cheering mobs made Italy's Savior an overseer over a Ford dealership in Milan. (They didn't have Teslas back thin)
I want my mommy!!!
An education is what you should want.
Everything you ever learned, I knew by kindergarten. You retarded Marxist fuck.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. - Christopher Hitchens
If DOGE is going to deliberately make it hard to check their claims, then no one should accept that what they say is true.
Nah. Remember the whole gun control "if it saves one life" shibboleth?
If it saves one dollar.
You are engaging a particularly slimy pile of lefty shit:
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
Who should fuck off and die.
Anyone remember when Sullum’s case of TDS made him a terrible libertarian? Now that he’s added a raging case of MDS, he’s even worse. I wouldn’t have thought it possible.
Pinoccio has a point there. Same thing happened in Czechoslovakia. Whin God's Own Populist made it Germany's 17th State, ungrateful and godless Jyooz had the nerve to faultfind. Some even took to keying the paint on tanks that didn't belong to them!
Estimates aren't supposed to be accurate. That's why they're called estimates.
If you want to talk about government waste, imagine formally auditing the entire thing to provide accurate numbers with backup. It wouldn't even be fully possible and they would still have to make estimates and then put a million footnotes letting you know why they estimated.
Alternatively, you can check your TDS at the door, realize that Elon has no incentive to lie about government waste (oh yes, look we're doing an even shittier job than you knew!), and take the figures with a grain of salt. Remember, this is waste Trump and every President before him tolerated and/or failed to address. It's not an "owning the libs" moment. It's owning our entire system of politics and government.
"...If you want to talk about government waste, imagine formally auditing the entire thing to provide accurate numbers with backup. It wouldn't even be fully possible and they would still have to make estimates and then put a million footnotes letting you know why they estimated..."
Pretty sure the DoD (which, but now, is a minor expense) hasn't passed an audit it YEARS, and now Trump isn't allowed to cut waste because it might not be accurate?
This is not now, has never been, and will never be about transparency. Trotting out red herrings does not make the case for limited government in any way at this point. The only facts I care about will not become apparent for another few months if ever: how many employees and their jobs were eliminated? And how much was government payroll salaries and benefits reduced at the end of the day? Even more important for the longer run will be: how many regulations were eliminated and how much private money was saved from no longer attempting the impossible job of trying to comply with massive, opaque, vague and self-contradictory federal regulations? If free enterprise becomes much more free over the next few years, how much better off will the American people and the people of the world be from renewed innovation and profitability? This hand-wringing over "constitutionality" long after all pretense of following the original intent of the Constitution was abandoned is wearing a little thin, guys!
I've disagreed with you on many issues, but this is central. TY.
And this just in: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/13/fired-federal-probationary-employees-court-ruling-00228721
A socialist "judge" from socialist San Francisco in the socialist workers state of California appointed by a socialist philandering President issues a totally non-partisan unbiased impartial ruling without any reference at all to the Constitution of the United States of America or case law but, get this! "I tend to doubt that you’re telling me the truth. I’m tired of seeing you stonewall on trying to get at the truth. It is a sad day when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance when they know good and well that’s a lie. The words that I give you today should not be taken that some wild-and-crazy judge in San Francisco said that an administration cannot engage in a reduction in force. How could so much of the workforce be amputated suddenly overnight? It's so irregular and widespread, so aberrant in the history of the country.” In other words, "It's illegal because I say so! It's mean and I don't like it, and no one has ever been so mean before so it must be illegal." No wonder it's so hard to oppose two months of Trumpian tyranny when it doesn't hold a candle to decades of socialist tyranny ...
"journalists", News Corps, and NY Times - nice source of information you have there Sullum. They never lie or are wrong right? Are these the same journalists that facts checked transgendered mice and where wrong? What about the same experts that can't tell O from zeros in EPA rules?
Are these the same journalists that facts checked transgendered mice and where wrong?
Yes. It is much better to trust Trump and social media bubbles than any sort of supposed journalists.