Staff Reports
Washington is in a frenzy — and this time the chaos is of the administration’s own making. What the White House cheerfully calls the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, was rolled out as a scorched-earth plan to cut waste and “drain the swamp,” but it has rapidly become a lightning rod for legal fights, leaking documents, and accusations of indiscriminate purges across the federal workforce.
The administration’s playbook has involved a deferred-resignation program and mass reduction-in-force actions that have touched hundreds of thousands of civil servants, leaving agencies short-staffed and morale shattered. Courts have already stepped in to order reinstatements and slow the slide, underscoring that the Biden-era style civil service protections are still a real constraint on political overreach.
During the recent funding standoff the disruption became painfully concrete — thousands of federal workers received termination notices or were placed on indefinite leave as agencies scrambled to comply with guidance from OMB and DOGE teams. Public health and critical services were hit hard, with the CDC and HHS among the agencies forced into abrupt cuts that will throttle essential capabilities if allowed to continue. The scene is not the result of a conspiracy but of sloppy implementation and a reckless timeline that trades competence for spectacle.
The DOGE experiment has only increased controversy because of the high-profile involvement of public figures and the administration’s secrecy. Courts have demanded internal records, and the White House has repeatedly been forced to clarify exactly who is empowered to make these sweeping personnel decisions, which only feeds distrust in a program that promised transparency. Americans deserve a leaner, smarter government, but they also deserve one that follows the rule of law and preserves national security.
Conservatives should not reflexively oppose any effort to shrink a bloated federal bureaucracy, and many patriots welcome an honest trimming of redundant offices and political DEI agendas. Yet there is a clear difference between principled reform and a chaotic purge that replaces experience with chaos and leaves veterans, veterans’ benefits administrators, and critical emergency personnel in limbo. The aim should be competence, not revenge, and the administration must answer for the self-inflicted damage to essential services.
Some of what we’re seeing is theater — offers to resign that turn into taxpayer-funded retirements, opaque transfers of power to private actors, and headlines about mass departures that confuse Americans about who is actually carrying out the work of government. That confusion helps the left’s narrative machine, but it also gives legitimate critics ammunition: if you want smaller government, deliver savings and better outcomes without creating security gaps or paying people to sit at home. The American people deserve both efficiency and accountability.
If this nation is to have a smaller, more effective federal government it must be reformed through clear laws, congressional oversight, and leaders willing to protect national security while cutting bureaucracy. The tantrums in the swamp are not the answer; thoughtful conservatives must demand better execution, transparency, and a return to merit-based hiring even as we press to eliminate waste. Hardworking Americans will cheer a government that serves them efficiently — not one that collapses under headline-driven purges and leaves the public to pay the price.
