Journal Editorial Report: “One is for big government. The other wants to shrink it.” Click here to view video. Photo: Mandel Nganerin Schaff/AFP via Getty Images
by Patrice Johnson | September 11, 2024
During last night's debate, Donald J. Trump was Trump. Tough and authentic, he sounded spontaneous, and his thoughts sometimes appeared to wander. He was reactive--a construction guy. In contrast, gone was the tittering, fawning, Marxist Kamala Harris. In her shoes stood a prosecuting attorney, determined to enfold viewers in her love of them--all while landing brutal, strategic punches on her opponent and wheedling under his skin. Harris's handlers equipped her with stories designed to tug at viewers' heartstrings. Her needling succeeded in keeping Trump from elevating the discussion to address the ideological differences between them. To understand the two candidates’ diametrically opposed views, one need only take a peek at two of their recent policy announcements.
On Sept. 5, Trump appeared at the Economic Club of New York. Here the former president floated the idea of creating a “Government Efficiency Commission” to “conduct a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government.”
In contrast, Harris is stumping for “greater tax incentives for small businesses.”
The Wall Street Journal Editorial Report summarized the opposing Harris v Trump views on the roles and size of government this way:
“One is for big government. The other wants to shrink it.”
Photos: Jeff Kowalsky/Chip Somodevilla for Getty Images
Harris's Vision of Government
During last night's debate, Harris reiterated her proposal to give $50,000 tax breaks to startup businesses. In short, she would have the government take taxpayer dollars and use them to fund small businesses.
Glenn Beck waves a red flag at any cozy relationship between government and private industry. He goes so far as to define government-private partnerships as fascism. They lead to government tyranny, cronyism, and favoritism, Beck claims in his book, The Great Reset: Joe Biden and the Rise of Twenty-First-Century Fascism.
Trump’s Vision for Government Reform
During his Economic Club speech, Trump’s saying he would form a government efficiency commission may have struck attendees as mundane at first. Then Trump added that Elon Musk, the renowned CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, might head this commission and had volunteered for the job.
Trump emphasized the commission’s mission to “totally eliminate fraud and improper payments within six months.” Though Trump’s claim that this would save “trillions” may lean toward hyperbole, few would dispute, even across party lines, that wasteful government spending is rampant.
Musk seems a fitting candidate for the task. As a self-made man and one of the world’s wealthiest entrepreneurs, the CEO of several cutting-edge companies has demonstrated with consistency how private businesses can outperform public institutions. His company, SpaceX, showed NASA how private industry could reduce costs and increase innovation in space exploration. His Tesla company has no peer when it comes to environmentally friendly, battery-operated vehicles. His purchase of X (formerly Twitter) exposed evidence of government-Big Tech collusion to silence free speech and political opposition.
Given Musk’s relentless pursuit of efficiency and his disruption in the tech and transportation sectors, few would doubt his skills could be applied to government operations with potentially transformative results.
Size of Government
One of the central issues at play is the sheer size of the U.S. government. The U.S. government is the nation’s largest employer and accounts for almost 25% of the economy. Its reach extends into almost every aspect of American life. As of 2024, the number of Walmart workers, which total 1.5 million, is dwarfed by the nearly 9.1 million federal government workers, including 2.1 million federal employees, 4.1 million contract employees, and over 1 million active military personnel.
Plus, taxpayers additionally subsidize a ballooning shadow government of some 5.3 million contract and non-governmental organization (NGO) employees.
Keep in mind, the government generates essentially no money of its own. Taxpayers pay its expenses from their hard-earned dollars.
Government inefficiency dwarfs its size
More than the size of government is at issue. Worse is its stunning inefficiency. As Ronald Reagan used to quip, the closest thing to eternal life is a government program.
An old Washington joke told of the Agriculture Department worker who was asked why he was so unhappy. Answer: ‘My farmer died.’ The point is still relevant.
-- WSJ editorial report regarding Donald Trump’s speech on the economy last week
Federal workers, for instance, earn on average 17% more than their private-sector counterparts paying their salaries. These government employees work 12% fewer hours and, in general, enjoy better benefits ranging from healthcare to retirement. The federal layoff and firing rate is also staggeringly low: Only 0.2% of federal workers are laid off or fired each year, nearly 20 times less often than workers in the private sector.
By comparison, July 2024 data shows total private industry layoffs or discharges of 1,675,000 million workers, compared to 86,000 layoffs or discharges among total federal, state, and local government workers (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics).
In this writer’s past life as a corporate executive, each department was tasked with trimming 10% from the budget creep that had occurred over the prior 12 months. Painful as the cuts were, they forced efficiences and kept the corporation healthy. Try running this notion past government entities, however, and we will hear howlings from sea to shining sea.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, tens of billions of dollars were lost due to fraudulent unemployment benefits and misused Paycheck Protection Program funds. Loopholes in government programs, such as the Employee Retention Tax Credit (ERTC), further exacerbate the issue. One California prison inmate allegedly claimed more than $550 million through the ERTC, a stark illustration of how poorly overseen programs lead to government waste.
Musk’s Approach: Disruption and Accountability
Musk’s efficiency-first approach could have far-reaching implications for government operations. The Grace Commission that Ronald Reagan stablished in the 1980s, conducted a similar audit of federal programs and recommended more than 2,000 reforms, many of which were enacted and saved billions of dollars.
Musk’s private sector experience and expertise in scaling complex operations could reignite such efforts, bringing fresh eyes and new strategies to streamline government functions.
Even Bill Clinton’s effort in the 1990s to “reinvent government,” led by then-Vice President Al Gore, had some success. However, the initiative eventually faltered due to opposition from unions and political compromises. Musk’s reputation as a disruptor might be what is needed to push through the necessary reforms without succumbing to entrenched interests.
A Bipartisan Opportunity?
The idea of Musk leading a commission on government efficiency offers an opportunity for both Democrats and Republicans to support a non-partisan effort that benefits all taxpayers. According to the Pew Research Center, public trust in the federal government is at an historic low, hovering around 22%. A government-wide audit led by a figure like Musk could potentially restore some of that trust. It could demonstrate that Washington, D.C. is serious about cutting waste and improving performance.
While Trump’s idea to unleash Elon Musk on the inefficiencies of government may initially seem too good to be true, it could be a game-changer, and Trump has a track record of implementing his promises. (Think border wall, cutting regulations, strengthening the military, and making the Veteran’s Administration responsive to veterans.)
Musk’s relentless drive for innovation and his proven track record in revolutionizing industries could lead to significant cost savings, enhanced transparency, and a leaner, more efficient federal government focused on public service.
As Trump himself noted, "Elon volunteered for the job." If this plan takes flight, it could signal a new era in which private-sector efficiency is applied to the unwieldy—often arrogant, if not tyrannical--public sector. Even skeptics should admit that the prospect of such reform is, at the very least, worth exploring.
Sources
Trump’s Best Idea: Unleashing Elon Musk on Government, Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, Sept. 9, 2024.
State.gov: Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) in the United States
Learning Candid: Nonprofit Facts and Statistics
Johns Hopkins University: Nonprofit Economic Data
Patrice Johnson, chairs Michigan Fair Elections (MFE) and Pure Integrity Michigan Elections (PIME). A former teacher, Patrice has founded five successful companies and served as senior executive with a Fortune 100 technology company. In 2017, she authored the book, the Fall and Rise of Tyler Johnson, the basis of a PBS documentary film, Finding Tyler. Questions or comments? Contact patrice@mifairelections.org.
Learn how We The People can win back and secure OUR Future.
Join us Thursday, September 12, at 12 PM for
the weekly Coalition Task Force Meeting
To attend this meeting, use the Registration link below . It changes weekly.
After registering, you will receive an email with details on how to join the meeting.
Note: Representatives of the media are allowed in our meetings only with prior permission.
Important Notes and Disclaimers for Election Integrity Network National Working Groups and coalition calls
We operate under strict 501 (c)(4) non-profit, non-partisan guidelines. Please do not make any comments during the call or in the chat that are directly related to any campaign or candidate running for office or could be considered an endorsement or opposition of that candidate.
All calls are “off the record.” This means that no members of the media are allowed on our calls without permission and this rule also applies to participants. No comment or presentation can be shared outside of the call without the express permission of the speaker. This includes the call "Notes" available to our participants.
We always welcome new participants but ask that all newcomers register with their own registration link. Please do not forward your personal link to another participant.
For the security of the call, if you join by phone, you may be asked to unmute and provide your name.
This meeting is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice or instruction to lobby on behalf of any issue or organization.
Mark Your Calendar
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of Pure Integrity Michigan Elections. Every article written by a PIME or MFE author is generated by the author or editor alone. Links or images embedded within the article, however, may have been generated by artificial intelligence.
Opmerkingen