Latest / Elon Musk Podcast / What Effect Will DOGE's 'Sledgehammer' Approach To Downsizing Have?

Transcript

What Effect Will DOGE's 'Sledgehammer' Approach To Downsizing Have? · Elon Musk Podcast

• 0:00
  I was in the analytics of this channel and I noticed something
• 0:03
  a little bit off 65% of you listen or watch and are not
• 0:09
  subscribed to the channel, but 35% of you are.
• 0:12
  And I appreciate you and thank you for subscribing.
• 0:15
  Now the other 65% of you that aren't subscribed, I'm going to
• 0:18
  make you a deal. If you subscribe to the channel
• 0:22
  right now, I will continue to bring you content that is better
• 0:27
  every single time. So it takes you a second to do
• 0:31
  that, but also you get something out of this too.
• 0:32
  Not only do you get my content, but you get content similar to
• 0:35
  mine that you'd be interested in in your feed because the
• 0:39
  platforms, they see what you do on their platform.
• 0:43
  If you like and subscribe here and also leave a comment, you're
• 0:46
  going to get more stuff like this in your feed and you're
• 0:48
  going to love it. Not just for me, but from other
• 0:51
  creators on the platform. So that's the deal.
• 0:53
  I make better content every time and all I ask is for a
• 0:57
  subscriber real quick. All right.
• 0:59
  Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• 1:05
  There's a lot of back and forth here about a lot of different
• 1:07
  things. It's hard to figure out what to
• 1:09
  focus on. I think we all want to try and
• 1:12
  get rid of waste, fraud and abuse in government.
• 1:14
  It's a major problem. It's going to require us to work
• 1:18
  together. A less finger pointing.
• 1:20
  It'd be great if we could get Mr. Must to come in here and
• 1:23
  outline different ideas he has for cuts, and then we could vote
• 1:26
  on it through what's called the rescission process.
• 1:29
  That would be a great thing if we could, Mr. Chairman, I know
• 1:32
  you're going to take it under advisement, but it would be
• 1:33
  great if we can get Mr. Mustard just come here and sit here and
• 1:36
  and lay out the different cuts that he thinks that should be
• 1:38
  made to the federal government. I think, you know, there's a lot
• 1:41
  of back and forth here. Mr. Smucker was talking earlier
• 1:44
  about the deficits. I mean, we just voted yesterday.
• 1:47
  You guys voted yes. We voted no on a budget with
• 1:50
  6.75 million, the billion dollars, trillion dollars in
• 1:54
  expenses and only 4.9 trillion in revenues.
• 1:59
  You voted yesterday for a massive deficit increasing
• 2:02
  budget. In addition, the big beautiful
• 2:05
  bill that everybody's talking about is going to increase the
• 2:09
  federal deficit by even more $3 trillion because there's only
• 2:12
  this. There's 4 1/2 trillion in tax
• 2:15
  cuts, but there's only about 1 1/2 trillion proposed in expense
• 2:20
  cuts. And those 1 1/2 trillion in
• 2:22
  expense cuts can't be made unless you cut Medicaid.
• 2:24
  And you say you don't want to cut Medicaid.
• 2:26
  So that's an additional, even under those rosy scenarios, an
• 2:29
  additional $3 trillion in deficits.
• 2:32
  So I don't know what you guys are talking about.
• 2:33
  You want to cut things, but you won't give us the specifics as
• 2:37
  to what's being done. Mr. Musk is operating.
• 2:40
  Miss Van Dyne talked about the witnesses that were here the
• 2:42
  other day. I asked each of the witnesses
• 2:45
  specifically, do you know what Mr. Musk is doing?
• 2:48
  Do you know if the hunt? I think you said 100 people are
• 2:50
  working for him. Lloyd, 100 people are working
• 2:53
  for Musk. I think he said.
• 2:54
  But I mean, did they get background checks?
• 2:57
  Do we know that? Do you know Mr. I'll yield to
• 3:00
  Mr. Smucker? Do you know if they got
• 3:01
  background checks? No, you don't know.
• 3:03
  Nobody knows. We don't know if they got
• 3:05
  background checks. We don't know what kind of
• 3:07
  security clearances they have. We don't know what their
• 3:09
  backgrounds are. I mean, these are simple basic
• 3:13
  questions in running a multi trillion dollar organization are
• 3:18
  the people that you have and and you know, we we people hear
• 3:22
  different names about them, but they're young people that are
• 3:25
  gamers and hackers and computer experts.
• 3:29
  We don't know what their backgrounds are.
• 3:32
  We don't know if they got proper security clearances.
• 3:35
  We don't know if they have background checks.
• 3:38
  So we've got a big problem in the federal government.
• 3:41
  We've got way more in expenses than we have in revenues.
• 3:46
  It causes deficits. Our deficits are the highest
• 3:49
  percentage of our GDP that it's been in decades.
• 3:54
  The proposal the the CR that was passed yesterday increases the
• 3:58
  deficit. The big beautiful bill that this
• 4:01
  group is proposing will dramatically increase the
• 4:05
  deficit. So you say we have to find
• 4:07
  expenses to cut. We need to go after waste,
• 4:10
  fraud, abuse. Yes, let's do that.
• 4:13
  But we don't know what the expenses are that they're
• 4:18
  proposing. They're supposed to come before
• 4:20
  the Congress and propose specific cuts so that we can a
• 4:24
  judge whether that makes sense. I don't think anybody here
• 4:28
  supports the idea. When they cut the people that
• 4:30
  oversaw the nuclear stockpile, nobody thought it was a good
• 4:33
  idea. Nobody thought it was a good
• 4:35
  idea when they cut the people that oversee the avian flu.
• 4:39
  Nobody thought it was a good idea when they cut the people
• 4:42
  that oversee a measles outbreak. Nobody thought those were good
• 4:46
  ideas. I don't think anybody here is
• 4:47
  going to think it's a good idea when they're cutting thousands
• 4:50
  and thousands and thousands of employees at Social Security so
• 4:54
  that when people start calling up Social Security and they
• 4:57
  can't get their calls answered. And then you guys are going to
• 5:00
  say, look at that, I told you it was broken.
• 5:02
  But you want to cut 10,000 employees out of the 54,000 that
• 5:05
  are there. And then there's going to be an
• 5:07
  argument like there's been in the past to privatize Social
• 5:09
  Security. So let's just work together.
• 5:12
  Let's say we all want to try and balance the budget.
• 5:16
  We all want to get rid of waste, fraud and abuse.
• 5:19
  To do that, we have a process and procedure in place for the
• 5:23
  federal government. You can't do it through
• 5:25
  impoundment. That's been ruled by the courts
• 5:27
  and there's laws specifically passed by Congress that you
• 5:30
  can't do it that way. You have to go through the
• 5:32
  rescission process. So to come and make a proposal,
• 5:36
  I want to cut this, I want to cut that.
• 5:38
  I want to cut this, I want to cut that.
• 5:39
  This doesn't make sense. That doesn't make sense.
• 5:42
  And then we decide yes or no based upon those individual
• 5:45
  things. It's a process that you're
• 5:47
  supposed to go through. It's not so supposed to be done
• 5:49
  in the dark by some 20 year old kids that we don't know if they
• 5:53
  got background checks or not. So let's all work together and
• 5:56
  try and accomplish our common goals of trying to make our
• 5:58
  country a better place. Thank you.
• 6:00
  I yield back. Recognize, Mr. Thanador, you are
• 6:03
  recognized. Thank you, Chair, and thank you
• 6:08
  to our guest here. The Inspector Generals play a
• 6:14
  crucial role in combating waste, fraud and abuse, and promoting
• 6:19
  efficiency and effectiveness in government programs and
• 6:23
  operations. However, they must adhere to
• 6:27
  integrity, objectivity, and independence standards.
• 6:33
  Previously, GAO found that a lack of transparency in DHSOIGS
• 6:40
  selection of work topics called into questions the independence
• 6:45
  of the organization. What changes?
• 6:49
  This is a question for Miss Bernard and Miss Lang.
• 6:52
  What changes has the OIG made to ensure transparency when
• 6:58
  selecting work proposals and how does the agency ensure it is
• 7:03
  targeting the highest risk areas at DHS?
• 7:11
  Thank you so much for the question and thank you for
• 7:13
  recognizing the importance of Inspectors General DHSOIG.
• 7:19
  That is very important for us. We always want to make sure
• 7:22
  we're allocating our resources very wisely, especially
• 7:27
  recognizing we are overseeing an A department with 22 components
• 7:32
  over 260,000 employees worldwide.
• 7:36
  It's very important that we allocate our resources to
• 7:39
  address the highest risk. So I am really proud of our risk
• 7:43
  based approach to make sure we are helping DHS accomplish its
• 7:48
  most critical mission areas and its most critical challenges.
• 7:54
  So we do have a recurring and repeatable framework for that.
• 7:58
  It encourages staff to consider project ideas from multiple
• 8:04
  sources internally and externally.
• 8:08
  My question here is, will you commit to commit that the OIG
• 8:13
  audits, evaluations, and investigations of the Trump
• 8:17
  administration will meet integrity, objectivity and
• 8:22
  independence standards and help ensure DHS operates within the
• 8:27
  law? Yes.
• 8:29
  I can assure you we will continue conducting our
• 8:32
  oversight work in accordance with our statutory statutory
• 8:37
  authority. We will remain independent and
• 8:40
  objective and we'll continue to follow our auditing standards
• 8:43
  and our work continues unabated as we currently are still
• 8:48
  working under our Inspector General, Doctor Kafari.
• 8:51
  Thank you. And my question to Mr. Curry is,
• 8:54
  for over 100 years, GAO has played a crucial role in
• 8:59
  enhancing the effectiveness of government programs and ensuring
• 9:03
  taxpayer money is well spent. Over the past 20 years, GAO work
• 9:09
  has resulted in about 1.45 trillion in financial benefits
• 9:14
  and over 30,000 programs and operational benefits.
• 9:20
  Through its high risk list, GAO focused attention on the most
• 9:24
  significant challenges facing the government.
• 9:28
  Once the challenge is human capital, including skills
• 9:31
  shortage, a challenge Doge does not seem to appreciate as it
• 9:38
  purges civil servants. What are the consequences of
• 9:43
  reducing the federal workforce using a sledgehammer rather than
• 9:48
  a scalpel? Well, you're correct.
• 9:52
  Many of the high risk areas, and there's over 30 of them across
• 9:55
  all of the federal government that we've identified are on the
• 9:58
  list because of some sort of staffing or capacity challenge.
• 10:02
  That means that either they don't have the right number of
• 10:05
  people to perform the mission or they don't have the right
• 10:07
  skills. So typically what you do is you,
• 10:11
  you figure out what you want the government or the agencies to do
• 10:14
  and how you want to do it, and then you figure out what sort of
• 10:17
  staff you need to do it. So obviously it's, it's going to
• 10:20
  have some implications, but you know, we, we don't know yet what
• 10:24
  exactly those will be. Thank you.
• 10:25
  And Miss Lang, I didn't give you any time to respond.
• 10:27
  So if you want to take a couple 30 seconds if you like.
• 10:32
  No thank. You I.
• 10:33
  Think my colleague covered everything.
• 10:35
  Thank you, Chair, and I yield back.
• 10:42
  Hey, thank you so much for listening today.
• 10:44
  I really do appreciate your support.
• 10:46
  If you could take a second and hit the subscribe or the follow
• 10:48
  button on whatever podcast platform that you're listening
• 10:51
  on right now, I greatly appreciate it.
• 10:53
  It helps out the show tremendously and you'll never
• 10:56
  miss an episode. And each episode is about 10
• 10:59
  minutes or less to get you caught up quickly.
• 11:02
  And please, if you want to support the show even more, go
• 11:05
  to patreon.com/stagezero and please take care of yourselves
• 11:10
  and each other and I'll see you tomorrow.