Reforming the unreformable

Much of national news these days seems to be dedicated to the present administration’s efforts to reform government. This is nothing new. The history of the executive branch is littered with attempts to rein in government, resulting in little or no lasting effect. The latest initiative, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), follows a well-worn path of past reform movements promising to streamline bureaucracy, cut waste, and improve efficiency.

The Brownlow Committee of 1937, formed under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, sought to reorganize the executive branch by consolidating over 100 agencies into 12 departments. While its proponents saw it as a necessary restructuring, critics decried it as a power grab that tightened presidential control over federal agencies. The pushback foreshadowed the resistance that reform efforts would face for decades to come.

Subsequent efforts came in the form of the Hoover Commissions—two separate initiatives led by former President Herbert Hoover, first from 1947-1949 under Truman and again from 1953-1955 under Eisenhower. The commissions attempted to eliminate waste, fraud, and inefficiency while consolidating agencies. Labor unions and liberal interest groups raised concerns that the measures would reduce government spending on social programs and weaken regulatory oversight of businesses. While some recommendations were implemented, the fundamental structure of government remained essentially unchanged.

In 1982, President Ronald Reagan took a more business-minded approach, commissioning businessman J. Peter Grace to lead a study on eliminating waste and inefficiency. The resulting Grace Commission echoed many previous recommendations, but critics alleged ethical conflicts, noting that the interests of its corporate advisors might benefit from the proposed reforms. Though the phrase “drain the swamp” originated during this period, the swamp remained largely intact.

A decade later, in 1993, Vice President Al Gore spearheaded the National Partnership for Reinventing Government (NPR), an initiative to make the federal government “work better, cost less, and get results Americans care about.” The effort sought to eliminate over 250,000 federal jobs and streamline operations, drawing sharp criticism from federal employee unions concerned about job security and fairness in personnel reforms. While some efficiency gains were made, government bureaucracy continued to expand.

The President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency, launched in 2006, targeted financial reporting and improper payments, emphasizing performance-based pay and accountability. Again, federal employee unions resisted, fearing that performance-based personnel policies would create unfair treatment and undermine job protections. Despite the reforms, government spending and regulatory complexity continued to grow.

Flash forward to DOGE—an initiative with a similarly ambitious goal of reducing waste, eliminating fraud and cutting excessive regulations. Unlike past efforts, however, the initiative has taken a highly aggressive approach, more akin to a wrecking ball than a careful restructuring. Led by a notoriously cavalier president and a controversial advisor, DOGE has become a media spectacle, with more focus on the ad hoc team of investigators—who make for easy targets—than on the findings of their investigations.

Yet, DOGE has uncovered evidence of waste, including billions of dollars in what appears to be fraudulent spending by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Detractors argue that the approach threatens labor protections and vital government services while raising constitutional questions. The question remains: Will this administration’s brash approach succeed where previous efforts have failed, or is this another bid for organizational control? Time will tell, but history suggests that bureaucracies have a way of outlasting reformers, no matter how determined they may be.