President Donald Trump and “First Buddy” Elon Musk are taking the same approach to the federal bureaucracy that Musk took to Twitter — planning an overnight gut-level renovation, and expecting anyone not onboard with the new decor to get out. Even if it works — which is far from certain — it could easily backfire when it comes to their ideas about a more competitive, tech-savvy American future and government. By freezing federal funding yesterday (although a judge later temporarily stayed the order, and today the Office of Management and Budget unexpectedly rescinded their memo announcing it) and seemingly offering private sector-style buyouts to all federal workers, the Trump administration is replicating the tactics that transformed Twitter from a midsize social media company into a stripped-down, peronalized vehicle to spread Musk’s right-wing agenda. The Office of Personnel Management even used the same email header that Musk used at Twitter, “Fork in the Road,” to offer the buyouts. But the federal government is not a private corporation, with at-will employment and plenty of room for severance packages. And the funding spigot that OMB chief Russell Vought and his raiders want to shut off flows to plenty of programs that might play a key role in building the tech-savvy, globally dominant technological future for which Musk has repeatedly stumped. If Trump and Musk are going to run the Tesla playbook in Washington, they might be in for their own unexpected culture shock. Even committed reformers have serious doubts: “There’s no precedent for this in the public sector” when it comes to the Office of Personnel Management’s payout offer, Jennifer Pahlka, co-founder of the U.S. Digital Service (now the U.S. DOGE Service) and a fellow at the Niskanen Center, told DFD. “A lot of people are simply committed to the mission of serving the American public, and they know that if they leave those jobs that the mission could be compromised,” Pahlka said. “I think you’re going to see a lot of people stay.” Some early signs indicate that the shock-and-awe tactics might not have the intended effect. Tuesday, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) urged federal employees to stay on the job, and progressive activist Amanda Litman pointed on X to a Reddit thread featuring anonymous users purporting to be federal employees pledging to remain at their posts merely to undermine what they see as, in one anonymous commenter’s words, “nepobaby freaks” who are “abusing the system.” “I was chill and laid back prior,” another wrote. “Now I’m digging my heels in out of spite. I’m a big time hater and being petty is my favorite thing to do.” The Trump administration has obstacles beyond just cranky employees. If staffers refuse the payouts — the legality of which is still very much up in the air — they’ll still be entitled to their normal employment protections, meaning a more specific and potentially messier approach would be required to get rid of them. And when it comes to laying the groundwork for American competitiveness — meaning research and investment in the future — the blunt-force approach could be equally inappropriate to the task. Robert Atkinson, founder and president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, sees the freeze largely as an attempt by the Trump administration to identify and reverse the social justice or equity-related initiatives introduced by former President Joe Biden. But the overall effect, he worried, will likely be to destabilize America’s public science infrastructure. “You don’t use a blunderbuss for this, you use a rifle shot approach,” Atkinson told DFD. That kind of measured, precise approach is a far cry from Musk’s preferred tactics, which more resemble finding and deleting bad code. Atkinson remains skeptical that the Trump administration is committed to spending what it takes to boost American research, even under less of a shock doctrine — and equally skeptical that the hardcore libertarians in Trump’s orbit will be up for aligning Silicon Valley with the state in a way that would fill in the gaps. “They have this narrative that … if you cut R&D in the federal government, you'll actually get more in the private sector,” Atkinson said. “Overall, they're probably not going to go forward with a lot of industry-university partnerships.” Universities themselves aren’t encouraged: The Association of American Universities’ President Barbara R. Snyder said in a statement Tuesday about the funding freeze that the group is “extremely concerned about the impact of this action on our country’s ability to maintain its scientific and technological lead against competitors and potential adversaries,” and Harvard University’s President Alan Garber warned students and faculty Tuesday that research might come to a halt. Meanwhile, Musk’s DOGE trumpeted on X Tuesday evening that the office “is saving the Federal Government approx. $1 billion/day, mostly from stopping the hiring of people into unnecessary positions, deletion of DEI and stopping improper payments to foreign organizations, all consistent with the President’s Executive Orders,” something the post’s author called a “good start.” If early warnings about their hardcore austerity approach bear out, they might be unhappily surprised by where they end up when DOGE’s work is finished.
| 
