[00:00:00]
John Zogby: Hi, it's Friday and it's a regular episode of the Zogby Report, real and unscripted every week. Pretty much, Jeremy and I get together, talk about a key issue dominating the news or dominating the world. There are so many things to talk about I have just selected in my mind, the following D O G E department of government efficiency.
John Zogby: I thought we'd wax a little eloquent on that. Department of government efficiency. I'll start out. I like the sound of it.
John Zogby: And while that has been viewed as almost intractable for over a century, doing anything whatsoever to the cost of the federal government, it, you know, grows and [00:01:00] grows like the movie, The Blob. It's also been pretty impossible for any president, any administration to do anything about it. Why? Because fiefdoms are created in the federal bureaucracy, fiefdoms, agencies, large and small with budgets, money to spend, money to spend before the end of the year, discretionary money, and if there are congressmen and women who are so inclined to To eliminate certain agencies, the agencies pounce, the lobbying groups pounce, money is offered not as bribes, but as spending money in local districts, and there goes the threat of reducing or even cutting an agency or some jobs.
John Zogby: But this time is a little different. There, there's a mandate. I think, you know, Donald Trump [00:02:00] didn't get 50 1%, but he won. And the electoral college victory was an impressive victory. And this time, unlike 2016, he's prepared and he is nominating disruptors and folks who like him. See it as a mandate to turn things upside down and to save money.
John Zogby: And I believe that the middle class, the working class of all races that voted for Donald Trump see that as a mandate that we've got to stop accumulating national debt that we always think in terms of taxes. Because we can't think in terms of cutting, but I do think that we are in that cost cutting mode.
John Zogby: Now, can Donald Trump pull it off? [00:03:00] Can he do it successfully? Get it started at least. Can he reduce the size of government without moving from disruption to chaos? What happens to the tens of thousands of federal workers who are protected, but now not protected, probably because of, of some legal.
John Zogby: Or contractual obligation that, that they're under plus their capacity to offer Congress money for local districts. That's the, the big question. He is clearly, and this is my last point. He is clearly appointed disruptors. People in fact, who one can argue are hostile to the agencies that they're supposed to run.
John Zogby: Whether that's for good or evil remains to be seen. I am taking the position, I'm not a fan of Donald Trump. You [00:04:00] know that anybody who watches this knows that. I still find it hard to believe that anybody who could talk about Haitians eating cats. And other outrages could be elected president of the United States, but I'm willing to give him his honeymoon and willing to give him an opportunity to make good on his promises.
John Zogby: And I applaud the Democrats and to some degree, the liberal media for stepping back and not. I'll use, I'll make a verb out of this Adam Schiffing yet this time by just assuming That he's an evil man and that he needs to be investigated. So that is my opener. That's a screed. I think is what is what we call it, but that's my opener.
John Zogby: What do you think?
Jeremy Zogby: well, there's a lot there. But yeah, I mean, the notion of doggie the Department of Government efficiency is fascinating. These are questions and [00:05:00] comments that I have about that. I mean, first of all it's been a long time coming.
Jeremy Zogby: Republicans have talked about cutting government. And while they probably have, they've, they've grown it in other areas, but if, if there were a chart of government growth just overall, every election cycle, maybe every year, the government is growing and growing and growing, and I'm sure that that chart would show it at maybe a parabolic rate an exponential rate. And so it's been a long time coming. I mean, this goes back to Andrew Jackson, Jackson and the spoil system. This goes back to, you know, Grover Cleveland being a little bit like Donald Trump and going to clean out the system, the abuses of the, the civil service and his call for the reform. And we've been dealing with this since the 19th century. And then at the end of the 20th century, it went to the uber level, and then in the 21st [00:06:00] century, it went to the next uber level. And so, but one of the questions that I have is I mean, if you look at the nature of bureaucracy and government agencies, when one is formed, the, the understanding is, is that agency is supposed to remain permanent. Right? If there were a Department of Poverty, the Department of Poverty would have to resolve the issue of poverty, and then it would have to cut itself. But we've never really seen that. We've seen these departments take root and grow. And so Doggie is going to have to be different. It's going to have to be Will it have a shelf life?
Jeremy Zogby: Will it have a four year term? I don't know. And a list of goals of this is what we're going to cut. And then once we start to accomplish it, this is how it will dwindle out. Because if it remains permanent, [00:07:00] right, then we may have an idea where that is going. One could almost wonder if, if, if there needs to be efficiency in the government, does it have to be done through a department?
Jeremy Zogby: Couldn't it just be done through the cabinet? It is a very complex beast. The intelligence agencies alone have 17. I can't even imagine if you look at all of the federal agencies. So if there is a person who is going to do it or take a shot at it, a stab at it, it seems like it would be fitting that it would be Donald Trump. I can't think of the last president we had. I can't think of any other president we've had that was a businessman. I know some were inventors and in that regard entrepreneurial, but I don't think we've ever had a full fledged business person. And so he does have that background and he is bringing in people like Vivek and Elon Musk, who have entrepreneurial [00:08:00] backgrounds.
Jeremy Zogby: So it, this kind of falls under the banner of got to see what happens. But if it is going to be that department of government efficiency. It in its goals, it should have annual plans of this is what's tackled each year. And then it would seem right that the department would also show how it then is phased out. Because if it's not accomplishing what it's doing, then it's not going to phase out. You, one other thing, you brought up the federal workers cut. I mean, I'll ask this question. Especially at the middle and the high level, are these folks that are so inept that they're, they're really only capable of doing one thing and that's working at a bureaucracy and if that, if they are cut and let's say hundreds of thousands of them are unleashed into the economy. [00:09:00] Is it that like the equivalent of getting hundreds of thousands of immigrants who come into the economy and are open for for work yet? These folks, probably almost all of them, if not all of them have college degrees and have experience, so it is much, you know, it is different in that regard. In my analogy.
Jeremy Zogby: But I mean, are these will these folks end up homeless or are they just ready for? for hire. And is that an opportunity for new businesses to create to be created? Because we are talking about in the scenario of government being slashed, we are talking about hundreds of thousands of people in the labor force being freed up and ready for work.
John Zogby: You know, that's a very good point. And of course, that's what we'll have to see. They will fight tooth and nail. Because they're federal workers and federal workers have [00:10:00] advantages that their private sector counterparts don't. And that in itself is something that the great. Washington Post and New York Times columnist Tom Edsel has written about, about the middle class conflict between public sector workers who have pensions, vacation time, and other benefits.
John Zogby: Versus private sector workers in, in many ways, you know, similar incomes and so on, but don't have the, the protections or the benefits and there's a resentment, especially since it's the private sector. Workers who are by and large underwriting the cost of their public sector counterparts. And so we can look for that other element of conflict and disruption just tongue in cheek.
John Zogby: I just, when you use the term doggy I was inclined because I'm a [00:11:00] progressive. Liberal and and recovering academic to to call it doge. That seems much more elitist. So doge versus doggy. All right. With that said, you, you raise. I think some fascinating issues. I'm not optimistic. I don't know how committed Donald Trump is to anything long term.
John Zogby: And I don't know how committed he is to push, to fighting back pushback. I don't know how committed any of these people are that he's appointing or what kind of leash. They're going to be on, you know, I know he's, he told Robert F. Kennedy jr, you know, go in there. You got a free hand, go wild on healthcare.
John Zogby: Healthcare is a mess as far as bureaucracy is concerned, both in the federal level and in the private level. You know, when they talk about, [00:12:00] we're going to run the government, like we're running a business, the government is run the way healthcare. As a private businesses run, it's terribly top heavy inefficient and self sustaining.
John Zogby: You know, that's another piece of all of this. Um, the fact that so many agencies exist now because they exist. And there's a built in mechanism to fund them. You know, whether it's out of lethargy or fear or whatever that we're talking about a major break with our culture of cutting government.
John Zogby: On the other hand, you look at 34 trillion in debt, something has to. And I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he's going to try. I'm not optimistic though, that it can be successful. And incidentally you may or may not recall that under Bill [00:13:00] Clinton vice president Gore was selected to form the grace committee.
John Zogby: Commission, the, with the founder of WR grace to do a massive study on cutting the federal government that was debated for a short period and. That went away. And then under president Obama, the Erskine Bowles, Alan Simpson commission, pretty much to do the same thing, to look into government waste and where there could be more efficiency, which like the grace commission study was a wonderful study, identified an enormous amount of waste and an enormous amount of savings, but there just wasn't a will to continue.
John Zogby: So this time, the middle class and working class of all races voted for this and it was a substantial victory and so maybe we'll see some [00:14:00] progress so long as there is a safety net. I mean, we, we have to be committed and I haven't heard this yet from the administration, the new administration, so long as we are protecting those who are in real need and that's of above and beyond social security and Medicare.
John Zogby: It's also Medicaid and social services and you know, programs WIC, you know, that are designed to help poor people who cannot afford. Anything but government largesse
.
Jeremy Zogby: I haven't heard anything about social security Medicaid being cut. I just haven't. So that will be interesting. Just a few closing comments to some of the points that you brought up. I mean do you let the government largesse collapse on its own weight? Or do you make an attempt to cut and reform? [00:15:00] That's the question. I, I, I don't see right because we, we have to, we have to agree at that at some point, if it's not addressed, that in itself could be chaotic. I mean, that, that's been the story of bureaucracy and government and empires for the history of mankind. It's never fixed itself. It's just collapsed on its own weight of of weight upon weight. And so, so there's that question. And so, you know, either way, there's likely to be disturbance, but which is the path of least resistance? We'll find out. The other point that I want to address is you asked or questioned whether Trump is committed to this. I mean, you just have to look at what Trump has been through since 2016.
Jeremy Zogby: And one has to say, I think. The evidence speaks for itself. You know, I mean, his life was appended. Whether [00:16:00] you agree that he deserved it or didn't deserve it. That's immaterial. The fact is, is what he went through upon winning the presidency and assuming office in 2017. His life was never the same. In fact, his life was much better off before that, with everything that he ensued. What his supporters would say, law fair. And, and, and, and warfare, political warfare. So you have to think that this is beyond just a, a vanity and what let's just see if I could win a second time. Because it wasn't ugly ride. It wasn't ugly seven or eight years. And then as far as the health agency in, in Kennedy being able to reign in. My, my understanding is that so much wasn't from the perspective of business efficiency, but more or less tackling corruption. And that's about all I'll say because I think we've done a pretty [00:17:00] thorough and full show here.
John Zogby: Mm-hmm . And just for the record, I'm normally not inclined to give Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt but he won. And we'll see what happens. Have a good week.
Jeremy Zogby: Yes, we
Jeremy Zogby: will have a good week.