Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Reins in Government Waste

TLDR

This executive order established the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) led by Elon Musk, which claims to have saved billions through contract cancellations. Independent analyses show most claims are exaggerated—actual savings are less than $2 billion versus the claimed $65 billion. DOGE faces legal challenges from 14 states for constitutional violations, and experts warn its approach may increase long-term costs while destabilizing federal operations.

Over the past six weeks, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk under President Donald Trump’s executive authority, has enacted sweeping changes to federal contracting, workforce policies, and agency operations. While the administration touts these measures as transformative cost-cutting successes, a detailed examination of available data, legal challenges, and independent analyses reveals significant discrepancies between DOGE’s claims and verifiable outcomes. Below, we assess the validity of key assertions in the administration’s fact sheet, contextualized by recent developments and evidence.

Claims of Modernizing Federal Contracting and Grant Systems

The executive order asserts that DOGE will use “modern technology to transform Federal spending on contracts and grants” through rigorous reviews for waste, fraud, and abuse. However, DOGE’s implementation of this mandate has drawn scrutiny for methodological flaws and overstated savings.

DOGE’s “Wall of Receipts” initially claimed $55 billion in savings from canceled contracts, later revised to $65 billion. However, NPR’s analysis found that over 40% of terminated contracts listed by DOGE yielded no savings because funds were already legally obligated. For example:

• A $567,809 furniture contract at the Department of Housing and Urban Development had already been fully paid.
• A $145,549 carpet-cleaning contract at USAID was obligated to a Native American-owned firm before cancellation.

These examples illustrate DOGE’s practice of counting maximum contract values as “savings” without accounting for actual expenditures—a method criticized by contracting experts as “slash and burn” policymaking. Independent audits suggest true savings amount to less than $2 billion, or 0.03% of FY2024 federal spending.

Terminating contracts incurs hidden costs. The cancellation of a $231 million Social Security Administration contract with Leidos, for instance, may trigger litigation and settlement fees exceeding potential savings. Contract law experts note that the government remains liable for completed work under “termination for convenience” clauses, negating DOGE’s savings claims.

The fact sheet also emphasizes transparency in government payments and travel expenses. Yet DOGE’s operational practices contradict this principle. DOGE’s savings tracker has repeatedly published erroneous figures. A now-deleted $8 billion “savings” entry from an ICE contract—later corrected to $8 million—exemplifies systemic data inaccuracies. These errors persist despite Musk’s pledge of “maximum transparency,” undermining public trust.

Real Property Management and the Role of GSA

The executive order tasks the General Services Administration (GSA) with disposing of “unnecessary” government properties. While DOGE highlights a $4.1 million sale of a vacant Washington, D.C., school building, it omitted $24 million in deferred maintenance costs accrued over two decades. Such selective reporting obscures the net fiscal impact of asset sales.

The fact sheet alleges that the Biden administration prioritized DEI over merit in contracting—a claim unsupported by procurement data. DOGE’s termination of DEI-related contracts, such as a $2.23 million HHS equity assessment, appears ideologically driven rather than fiscally justified. Notably, the Social Security Administration’s improper payments to deceased individuals—a frequent DOGE talking point—account for less than 1% of total outlays, per the agency’s inspector general.

Legal and Constitutional Challenges

DOGE’s authority to access agency systems and unilaterally cancel contracts faces mounting legal challenges:

• 14 states have sued DOGE, arguing its structure violates the Appointments Clause and separation of powers.
• Federal employee unions allege DOGE staffers accessed Treasury payment systems and sensitive DOE nuclear data without proper clearances, risking cybersecurity breaches.
• Judges have temporarily blocked DOGE’s access to taxpayer information and halted workforce reductions pending litigation.

These disputes highlight DOGE’s contested legality and operational overreach.

Workforce and Institutional Consequences

DOGE’s rapid workforce reductions and contract cancellations risk destabilizing federal operations:

• The CDC terminated a $13.6 million contract with Deloitte for pandemic response restructuring, despite funds already being spent.
• FEMA officials fired over alleged migrant housing misuse have not been replaced, raising concerns about disaster preparedness.

Experts warn that haphazard cuts could increase long-term costs by forcing agencies to re-compete contracts or settle disputes.

DOGE’s first six weeks demonstrate a pattern of exaggerated savings, procedural irregularities, and ideologically and/or random motivated targeting of programs. While eliminating genuine waste remains a laudable goal, the administration’s reliance on misleading metrics and legally dubious tactics undermines its credibility. Lasting fiscal reform requires congressional action—not ad hoc contract cancellations—to address mandatory spending drivers like Medicare and Social Security. Until DOGE adopts transparent methodologies and respects statutory constraints, its claims of efficiency will remain contested.