- Trump directs Cabinet to lead federal workforce cuts, sidelining Musk's influence
- DOGE's claimed $105B savings under scrutiny for accuracy and methodology
- Internal tensions rise as Cabinet members resist Musk's efficiency mandates
- Executive order pauses tariffs, prioritizing North American trade relations
President Trump convened an urgent Cabinet meeting Thursday to clarify leadership roles amid growing tensions with Elon Musk’s government efficiency initiatives. Multiple sources confirm the President emphasized that agency heads – not Musk – hold ultimate authority over staffing and policy decisions. This intervention follows months of friction as Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has reportedly eliminated over 90,000 federal positions since 2023.
The administration’s cost-cutting measures face renewed scrutiny as DOGE publicizes savings claims exceeding $100 billion. However, independent analysts question these figures, noting inconsistent reporting methods and rebaselined budget metrics. When you factor in severance costs and contract replacements,explains Brookings Institution researcher Amanda Choi, the net savings might barely reach 35% of stated amounts.
Comparisons to Texas’s 2022 state workforce modernization program reveal critical lessons. The Lonestar Initiative achieved 18% operational cost reductions through phased retirements and AI adoption – a contrast to DOGE’s abrupt layoffs. Gradual restructuring preserves institutional knowledge,notes former Texas CIO Todd Smith. Federal efforts risk creating dangerous capability gaps in critical agencies.
Trump’s tariff pause announcement coincided with the Cabinet reshuffle directive, signaling broader strategic realignments. The President framed both moves as part of streamlining America’s competitive edge,though trade experts warn the tariff reprieve could weaken NAFTA renegotiation leverage. Workforce analysts highlight an emerging pattern: 68% of federal HR directors report increased early retirements since DOGE’s creation.
Three critical insights emerge from this power struggle: First, constitutional questions persist about private-sector leaders shaping federal policy. Second, measurable outcomes require transparent metrics beyond aggregate savings claims. Third, workforce reductions disproportionately impact technical roles – EPA and NASA have seen 22% greater attrition than administrative departments.
The administration walks a political tightrope, balancing small-government promises with operational stability demands. As one anonymous Cabinet secretary noted: Musk’s spreadsheet logic ignores that experienced staff prevent $50M errors – not just costs.With Musk threatening deeper cuts if agencies hesitate, this conflict may redefine public-sector leadership for decades.