February 26, 2025 • 22 mins
Host Stephanie Flanders speaks with Joshua Green, national correspondent at Bloomberg Businessweek, and editor Laura Davison about the likelihood of a shutdown, its consequences for the government and for Americans—and whether anything can stop Musk’s efforts to shrink the government.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio News. Musk, for all the
kind of excitement he's caused among Republicans, could actually be
setting them up for a real problem that's going to
hit when funding runs out on March fourteenth.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
I'm Stephanie Flanders, head of Government and Economics at Bloomberg,
and this is Trumpnomics, the podcast that looks at the
economic world of Donald Trump, how he's already shaped the
global economy, and what on earth is going to happen
next This week, our question is will Elon musk campaign
to make the US government more efficient actually lead to
(00:47):
its shutting down altogether in a few weeks time. On
March fourteenth, the Continuing Resolution that funds the US federal
government will run out and its work will shut down
unless the Republican Congress and Donald Trump reach an agreement. Now,
that was always going to be tough, but Elon Musk
scorched earth overhaul of the US government via the so
(01:08):
called Department of Government Efficiency DOGE appears to have made
it a whole lot harder. So that's left me wanting
to know what exactly are the chances the federal government
shuts down in a few weeks. And if it does,
will DOGE shut down as well? Or will that be
an opportunity for Elon Musk and his team to really
go to town. Now, of course, nobody knows the answer
(01:30):
to those questions, but I have two people here who
can speculate much more wisely than most. Josh Green, National
correspondent at Bloomberg BusinessWeek, author of the New York Times
bestseller Devil's Bargain, Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and the National Uprising. Josh,
great to have you back.
Speaker 1 (01:44):
Could to be with you and Laura.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
Davison, our White House editor specializing in DOGE taxes and
fiscal policy. I think of you as the DOGE czar,
but it just doesn't sound like a very nice name, Laura,
so I won't call you that, but very good to
have you.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
So.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
I think in a more normal year, we'd have talked
about the prospect of a government shut down long before now,
since we're so close to that formal deadline. But frankly,
there's just been too much going on.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
Josh.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
I mean, you did draw attention to this a few
days ago in your excellent Business Week newsletter, but you
describe their Elon Musk rampaging across Washington like Godzilla leveling Tokyo,
packing away at federal agencies and firing workers on mass
through Doge, I think, very good visual image. You had
fun there. Doge appears to be having quite a lot
(02:38):
of blowback out in people's constituencies. Is certainly causing a
lot of headlines, a lot of stories. But there's a
very specific problem for the Republican leadership in Congress when
it comes to these upcoming votes to keep the government running.
So can you just take us through what they needed
to happen and how Musk has made it harder.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
The vibe in Washington right now among republic pilkins is
very positive and very excited, and a lot of Trump
fans have really enjoyed watching Musk shutter agencies, fireworkers, create
all this chaos that has Democrats so upset, and of
course that's where all the news focus has been. But
if you look right now, the conference is divided between
a small group of hardline deficit hawks and the broader group,
(03:21):
which includes moderate Republicans from districts that Joe Biden won
who are concerned about deep spending cuts and so Republicans
haven't been able to agree on a spending bill. This
is not something that's new. In the past, Republicans have
run into the same problem In twenty twenty three, Kevin McCarthy,
the House Speaker, had to rely on Democratic votes. Last December,
(03:42):
Mike Johnson, his successor, again had to rely on Democratic
votes to averta shutdown. So before Elon Musk, there had
always been this kind of off ramp when I think
of as an off ramp, where a Republican House Speaker
who was in trouble could at the last minute cobble
together some kind of a deal with Democrats to keep
the government funded. This time, however, the Democrats I've spoken
(04:04):
to have been very angry about what Elon Musk is
doing and what Donald Trump is doing. And a couple
of them it said to me in the last couple
of weeks, why would we help out Speaker Johnson and
Republicans and agree to any kind of a deal. How
could we possibly trust it if Elon Musk and Trump
could just go ahead and summarily tear apart anything that
we'd agreed to. And to me, that raises an interesting
(04:25):
tension that a lot of people aren't focused on yet.
That Musk, for all the kind of excitement he's caused
among Republicans, could actually be setting them up for a
real problem that's going to hit when funding runs out
on March fourteenth.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
You mentioned that they've needed Democratic votes in the past.
Just to be specific about it, there are quite a
few Republican congressmen who and people who have never voted
for one of these continuing resolutions, even with larger majorities
than they have now, they've always had to go to Democrats.
Given that direct linkage that you're making with Elon Musk's
(04:58):
unpopularity with Democrats and the need to get some Democrat votes,
do you get the sense that they're going to link
the two in any way, that they're trying to put
some restraint on Doze or on President Trump more generally
in return for that support, or would that be too
explicit for them.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
No, that's exactly the question that I've been asking, and
the feedback I've gotten has been twofold. On the one hand,
there's the obvious worry, which you've mentioned, that how can
we have assurance that any deal we strike won't immediately
be torn apart or ignored by Musk? The question I've
been asking is would you actually write legislative language into
(05:34):
an agreement saying Elon Musk cannot cut this agency? Or
perhaps Trump could do what's called a presidential signing statement.
George W. Bush used to do these a lot, that
would specify his intentions for what a bill means and
how it should be interpreted. To guard it against Elon Musk,
There's got to be some kind of an assurance from
Democrats that the deal they agree to is going to
(05:55):
withstand Doge's attacks. But then the other factor in all
of this is that the Democratic Party is very unpopular.
It's favorability rating is something like in the mid thirties,
and so there's a lot of pressure on Democratic lawmakers
from Democratic voters not to simply roll over and enable
Trump and Republicans to continue what they view as an
(06:17):
assault on government. So there are a lot of forces,
I think, behind the scenes that are pushing the two
sides toward what looks to me to be a pretty
high chance of a government shutdown.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
I guess, just to be clear, everyone in Congress is
pretty unpopular, right. The Republicans in Congress are not super popular,
or you would say, you think specifically as the Democrats.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
I think the Democrats right now are more unpopular. I
saw Paul the other day that had Democrats running about
twenty points behind, I think, in popularity behind Republicans. When
Donald Trump even got a bit of a honeymoon, he
had higher favorability ratings and unfavorability he rings for the
first month or so of his presidency. But it's the
view of Democrats among their own voters that is so
(06:56):
worrisome to Democratic elected officials because they need this support
in order to stay in their jobs, and they're very
alert and attuned to the dissatisfaction in the Democratic base.
And that too is a factor that's going to play
into what Democrats are and aren't willing to agree on
when it comes to cutting it spending deal with the Republicans.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Okay, Joss, I might make you do a lot of work.
I have one more question. Go on to something else,
but I am interested. Do you think that doge has
changed the politics of a shutdown because we don't normally
talk about federal workers very much except if there's a shutdown,
But I feel like we spent the last two or
three weeks reading loads of stories about federal workers debating
whether they're all useless, or whether any of them are
(07:35):
really important. Do you think that maybe President Trump will
be less frightened of a shutdown in this context? Will
it just sort of muddy the waters around Doge.
Speaker 1 (07:44):
They're eager to test the proposition that the government really
doesn't need all these employees to function on it, so
I think there would be some appetite for a shutdown.
The danger with that is that in the past, Republicans
have gone into shutdowns saying, Oh, this isn't going to
be a big deal, it will be fine, the government
can cont you to run. In my view, we had
a test to that back during the first Trump administration
(08:04):
in twenty eighteen and twenty nineteen, when Republicans allowed a
shutdown to occur because Trump wanted to secure immediate funding
for a border wall, and the shutdown lasted thirty five days. Eventually,
there was a lot of blowback from ordinary Americans, and
Trump ended up agreeing to reopen the government without having
(08:24):
secured that funding. Republicans and Trump lost that shutdown because
the political pressure became too much for them to bear.
I think the longer a shutdown goes on, regardless of
how excited Republicans might be in the front end of that.
The political pressure on them to get the government running
again is only going to increase. Elon Musk may not care,
a lot of Republicans eager to fire government workers may
(08:47):
not care. But at the end of the day, Republican
elected officials want to keep their jobs and Trump wants
to maintain his popularity, and it's very hard for me
to see how they would be able to do that
over an extended government shutdown.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
I can be come back to a bit later, because
I do want to think about the implications for doge
itself and their activities if the government shuts down. But first,
I mean, we've had a lot of politics, which is
only occasionally allowed on Trumponomics, But I wanted to also
think about some of the numbers involved here, and specifically
have a quick think about whether all these firings and
scary emails and all the fire smoke coming out of
(09:22):
federal government thanks to DOGE, has actually produced a lot
of savings for the US taxpayer. So Laura, you and
your team keep a close eye on all this. And
I see that DOGE itself has claimed recently that it's
already found fifty five billion dollars worth of savings. Now,
our chief economy is pointed out, and a woe pointed
out on this show not long ago that you'd need
(09:42):
around eight times that you'd need more like four hundred
billion to really make a dent on the US borrowing trajectory.
But still in just a few weeks, fifty five billion
would be pretty impressive. Is it true so far?
Speaker 3 (09:56):
No, And they actually recently updated that number just sixty
five billion, But we still have seen their accounting of
how they got there.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So in the last few days it's gone up from
fifty five to sixty five.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
Yes, but the underlying sort of accounting doesn't bear that out.
Doge has really made this claim that they are the
most transparent agency out there, that they are doing this
all in public view. For the first couple weeks, what
this really was was just an x account just posting, hey,
we canceled this contract. We canceled that contract. In the
past week or so, they have put this all on
(10:26):
a Doze website and basically listed here are all the
contracts that we have canceled. If you go through there's
an At this point, I had a couple thousand there
when we did the math last week on this There
were about sixteen billion dollars worth of contracts listed there. However,
there was one that doesn't add up to the fifty
five billion that they were claiming at the top line.
And then once you dug down into these contracts, we
(10:48):
found one pretty major error that showed an eight billion
dollar contract that was actually an eight million dollar contract.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
That's the kind of a state you make when you're
the richest man in the world and you're just constantly
getting your millions and billions mixed up.
Speaker 3 (11:00):
But truly, as you mentioned, that doesn't really move the dial,
but it showed and caused a lot of called into
a question Doge and how transparent they are being. Actually,
they've accounted for about eight billion dollars worth of savings.
That's not that much here at Bloomberg when we're talking
about tax policies, we sometimes don't even really start talking
about them ntill they're about one hundred billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
Get out of bed for less than a few billions.
Speaker 3 (11:22):
Other other colleagues have noted for various tax savings that
in this bill that Republicans are looking to pass later
this year. Elon Musk personally could benefit by hundreds of
billions of dollars. So the fact that his group is
only saving eight billion dollars really just goes to show
just how they're barely denting the surface.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
And it's weird. I mean that particular example, the million
billion one. I mean, we joke around it, but actually
it's also one of those ones where it's just on
its face it's mad. You sort of wonder, how if
you just tell us a bit more about the detail
of what the claim is in terms of how this
contract would be bigger than anything that this company has
had anything to do with ever.
Speaker 3 (11:59):
Yes, so this was a contractor that's out in a
Washington suburb. Their average contract going back was about a
million dollars, so this having an eight billion dollar contract
would just be wildly out of proportion.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
And it is a DEI contract, right of course you
want to claim that you were wasting lots and lots
of money on DEI.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
Yes, And even for the agency this contract was going through,
their entire budget was only about nine billion dollars. So
the fact that they would have one single contract being
eight billion on DEI just doesn't stand up.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
And it was eight million.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
It was for eight million. The other thing that was
really called into question even of Okay, say you make
that accounting change, you have eight billion dollars in which
in what they say they've saved, all of these contracts
that are listed basically have a maximum value, and that
doesn't mean that top line number is actually what's spent,
So that eight billion dollars is probably actually much less
after you go through a discount all of these contracts
(12:47):
across the board. Doe just quick to point out that, look,
this doesn't account for all of the the leases that
we've canceled, all the personnel that we have pulled from
the federal government roles. But even still, even if you
give a very generous estimate to all of those, were
still just talking a couple more billion dollars here and there.
This claim that Musk started with a two trillion dollar
goal of cutting two trillion dollars from the federal deficit.
(13:08):
He's now decreased that to one trillion. So the goalposts
really keep moving here, just week by week.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
I guess you could say he's providing the open goal
by making all this transparent on the website, Given that
a lot of people seem to be quite happy to
take at face value that claims he's been making on x.
I guess they deserve some credit for the transparency of
the website, especially if it means we find all these
errors and we can constantly criticize them.
Speaker 3 (13:31):
The other criticism, though, is that there's really not a
lot of transparency requirements for DOGE. It is not a
department as all the other Department of Homeland Security. It's
really just an office within the White House. Musk himself
doesn't have to disclose his finances publicly. They also don't
have the same sort of scrutiny from a watchdog or
an inspector general that would have the same sort of oversight.
They don't have to report who the people are. There's
(13:52):
questions of are these doze kids, as they've been called,
going to these different agencies, a lot of them very young.
Have they completed their ethics training, the t training. There's
been some cases we've reported on lapses there that have
cropped up. So they really aren't subject to the same
hiring practices and scrutiny as any other of the federal
workers that they're going in and auditing.
Speaker 2 (14:10):
And to your point about the website, they don't seem
to have done a lot of basic arithmesy. This actually
takes us that the status of DOGE and the fact
that it's not subject to a lot of these things,
actually raises this much intriguing question of what happens to
DOGE efforts themselves in the case of a government shutdown,
And mean, I go back to you, Josh, what's your
(14:31):
sense would we consider the DOGE effort to now be
enough part of the federal government that all of its
people have to go home? Or would it the counter's
essential workers it's essential to be cutting the government even
as you shut it down.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
Yeah, it's a great question. That's one that Democrats and
Republicans have started to ask themselves. I spent yesterday talking
to a couple of House and Senate staffers just asking
the basic question, would DOGE be allowed to continue operating
in a government shutdown? There isn't a clear answer, but
the general sense that I got was that staffers both
in the House and Senate think that it probably would
be because the president does have a lot of leeway
(15:07):
to declare certain workers essential to the government. And so,
as one Democratic House staffer put it to me, I
don't think DOGE would even pause, I did get an
interesting illustration of the way that presidents used this power
to manipulate public opinion. And I think it might come
into play with Trump and Doze if there is a
government shutdown. Back in twenty thirteen, when Barack Obama was president,
(15:28):
there was a shutdown and Obama shut the National Parks down,
and Republicans got very angry about that because they said,
Obama has the power to keep this open. He's doing
this for political purposes to get people mad at Republicans.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
And he was compliance right, yeah, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1 (15:43):
But then during the twenty eighteen government shutdown when Trump
was president, Trump made a point of keeping a bunch
of stuff open, including the National Parks, in order to
underscore the argument that shutdowns aren't that bad and it
wasn't his fault when things got messed up during a shutdown.
Think if you flip that around and put it in
a Doze context, Trump, I don't see why Trump couldn't
(16:05):
argue that Doze are essential workers. They're actually helping to
balance the budget by continuing to kind of fire people
and do these things at Trump and Musk think is
so important. And I don't know what power Democrats would
have to stop them. So while we don't have a
clear and definitive answer yet, the assumption among people I
talked to on the Hill is that DOGE probably would
be able to continue operating in a shutdown.
Speaker 3 (16:26):
There's a lot of thought also with the DOGE that
a shutdown would actually be very beneficial because they wouldn't
be encumbered by all of the career staff that would
be in the office. They've run into lots of issues
where they want to access a data set, they want
access to certain files, and the staff that's there says no. Suddenly,
if you remove all those people from the building for
an extended period of time, DOGE has a lot more
leeway to just run roughshot and grab what they want.
Speaker 2 (16:49):
So you've raised the other sort of big question out
of all this. I started off asking where Republicans now
be less scared of a shutdown? Well, Democrats actually wonder
about really concerned about the federal government. Should they be
pretty concerned about shutdown?
Speaker 1 (17:03):
If you guys are right, it's a good question. I
think everybody's trying to figure this out. The impression I
have in talking to Democrats is that they're just very
frustrated with the way all this is going, and so
I don't imagine that a lot of them are going
to be eager to just keep things rolling along. There's
certainly an appetite among at least some Democratic staffers that
(17:23):
I've talked to, that Trump just needs to get a
taste of his own medicine, and he wants to shut
the government down. Let's go ahead and do it, and
let him deal with all the political blowback that happens
as a result of that. But one other thing I
think is worth mentioning is, and this is a concern
among Democrats I spoke to, is that there is a
lot of fear of what could doje in musk do
(17:44):
during a shutdown if they were allowed to continue operating.
And one particular area of concern is the treasury payment system.
There's been talk in the past among Republicans that a
shutdown wouldn't be so bad because they could sort of
decide which bills to pay and which bills not to
pay and keep things rolling for a long time. So
you't government wouldn't default on treasury bonds, but it might
(18:05):
shut down other payments. That is something that a lot
of people view is very dangerous. To the market, to
global markets if there were a shutdown. We now know
that the dose folks do have access to a lot
of these payment systems. Nobody really knows what could happen,
what kind of mishift they could get up to, if
this kind of scenario were to unfold.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
I guess we should say at this point it's got best.
We've interviewed a couple of times in Bloomberg in the
last couple of weeks. He comes from Wall Street. He's
been very clear that this is we're all getting ahead
of ourselves in worrying about specifically those functions and the
running of the treasury market. He thinks all of that
is hysterical. I think what you stated in terms of
the possible leavers they would have and the lack of
(18:47):
clarity we would have in the vent of a shutdown,
I think is all true. But we should say there
is supposedly someone who cares about these things sitting inside
fifteen hundred Pennsylvania Avenue that the Treasury Department. I guess
one last question is just goes back to this broader environment,
the rather febrile environment we have. If we have a shutdown,
(19:09):
rightly or wrongly, is it seem to be the sort
of defining battle between Congress and the executive This sort
of ongoing tussle we've had with President Trump over who
actually controls the power of the purse, who can control
whether to actually spend money or not. You were hinting
at it just now, Josh. Is this how it's going
to come to a head, perhaps even more than all
(19:29):
the court orders and all the cases that have gone out.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
I really don't know. I mean, right now, there's not
a lot of contention between Trump Doge and House Republicans,
Trump's own cabinet secretaries. Republicans in Congress have basically been
willing to let Trump and Musk operate as they wish.
At some point, maybe that battle comes to a head
and it becomes more visible, more publicly contentious. I just
(19:56):
don't know the answer of the question yet.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
I'd say we've just seen a glimmer of the sort
of fissures starting to form between Trump allies and Musk.
This really came to a head in this email that
went out over the weekend where Musk said, every federal worker,
send in five bullet points of what you've been doing
over the past week. This caused a lot of alarm,
ruined a lot of Cabinet secretary's weekends as they were
(20:18):
trying to figure out how to respond to this, and
a lot of agencies said ignore it, do not reply,
will handle this. Musk late last night got upset over
this and said, Okay, if you didn't reply this time, fine,
but we're going to send another email, and this time
you have to reply or else you'll be fired. This
runs in contrast of all of the guidance that both
agency heads have given, and these are Trump hand picked
(20:39):
people to run these places, as well as OPM with
the Office of Personnel Management or the HR for the
federal government. So we're starting to see this power struggle forming.
We'll see where we are. The shutdown is, if it happens,
is about fifteen days away. A lot can happen between
now and then.
Speaker 2 (20:55):
Yeah, we talk about the battle between different arms of government,
Congress and the White House, but if it's between Elon
Musk and everyone else, that's what seems to be coming
down to Laura occurs to me, you're not even I
think when you're on shutdown, you're not even allowed to
check your emails. So I guess he is if he
does get if we do get shut down, Elon Musk
is not going to be able to send a lot
(21:16):
more emails to federal workers that they're supposed to reply
to within a day or whatever.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
That would be a key point that would harm his
strategy here of they would say, look, couldn't respond because
you didn't let me.
Speaker 2 (21:27):
All right, well, Josh Green and Laura Davison, thank you
very much. That was a great Thank you, Thanks so much,
thanks for listening to this episode of trump Andomics from Bloomberg.
It was hosted by me Stephanie Flanders, and I was
joined by Laura Davison and Josh Green. Trump Andomics is
(21:47):
produced by Samasadi and Moses and Dam with sound design
by Blake Maples. Brendan Francis Newnan is our executive producer
and please do rate and review us wherever you listen
to podcasts, so a lot more people can listening. Turning
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio News. Musk, for all the
kind of excitement he's caused among Republicans, could actually be
setting them up for a real problem that's going to
hit when funding runs out on March fourteenth.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
I'm Stephanie Flanders, head of Government and Economics at Bloomberg,
and this is Trumpnomics, the podcast that looks at the
economic world of Donald Trump, how he's already shaped the
global economy, and what on earth is going to happen
next This week, our question is will Elon musk campaign
to make the US government more efficient actually lead to
(00:47):
its shutting down altogether in a few weeks time. On
March fourteenth, the Continuing Resolution that funds the US federal
government will run out and its work will shut down
unless the Republican Congress and Donald Trump reach an agreement. Now,
that was always going to be tough, but Elon Musk
scorched earth overhaul of the US government via the so
(01:08):
called Department of Government Efficiency DOGE appears to have made
it a whole lot harder. So that's left me wanting
to know what exactly are the chances the federal government
shuts down in a few weeks. And if it does,
will DOGE shut down as well? Or will that be
an opportunity for Elon Musk and his team to really
go to town. Now, of course, nobody knows the answer
(01:30):
to those questions, but I have two people here who
can speculate much more wisely than most. Josh Green, National
correspondent at Bloomberg BusinessWeek, author of the New York Times
bestseller Devil's Bargain, Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and the National Uprising. Josh,
great to have you back.
Speaker 1 (01:44):
Could to be with you and Laura.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
Davison, our White House editor specializing in DOGE taxes and
fiscal policy. I think of you as the DOGE czar,
but it just doesn't sound like a very nice name, Laura,
so I won't call you that, but very good to
have you.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
So.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
I think in a more normal year, we'd have talked
about the prospect of a government shut down long before now,
since we're so close to that formal deadline. But frankly,
there's just been too much going on.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
Josh.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
I mean, you did draw attention to this a few
days ago in your excellent Business Week newsletter, but you
describe their Elon Musk rampaging across Washington like Godzilla leveling Tokyo,
packing away at federal agencies and firing workers on mass
through Doge, I think, very good visual image. You had
fun there. Doge appears to be having quite a lot
(02:38):
of blowback out in people's constituencies. Is certainly causing a
lot of headlines, a lot of stories. But there's a
very specific problem for the Republican leadership in Congress when
it comes to these upcoming votes to keep the government running.
So can you just take us through what they needed
to happen and how Musk has made it harder.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
The vibe in Washington right now among republic pilkins is
very positive and very excited, and a lot of Trump
fans have really enjoyed watching Musk shutter agencies, fireworkers, create
all this chaos that has Democrats so upset, and of
course that's where all the news focus has been. But
if you look right now, the conference is divided between
a small group of hardline deficit hawks and the broader group,
(03:21):
which includes moderate Republicans from districts that Joe Biden won
who are concerned about deep spending cuts and so Republicans
haven't been able to agree on a spending bill. This
is not something that's new. In the past, Republicans have
run into the same problem In twenty twenty three, Kevin McCarthy,
the House Speaker, had to rely on Democratic votes. Last December,
(03:42):
Mike Johnson, his successor, again had to rely on Democratic
votes to averta shutdown. So before Elon Musk, there had
always been this kind of off ramp when I think
of as an off ramp, where a Republican House Speaker
who was in trouble could at the last minute cobble
together some kind of a deal with Democrats to keep
the government funded. This time, however, the Democrats I've spoken
(04:04):
to have been very angry about what Elon Musk is
doing and what Donald Trump is doing. And a couple
of them it said to me in the last couple
of weeks, why would we help out Speaker Johnson and
Republicans and agree to any kind of a deal. How
could we possibly trust it if Elon Musk and Trump
could just go ahead and summarily tear apart anything that
we'd agreed to. And to me, that raises an interesting
(04:25):
tension that a lot of people aren't focused on yet.
That Musk, for all the kind of excitement he's caused
among Republicans, could actually be setting them up for a
real problem that's going to hit when funding runs out
on March fourteenth.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
You mentioned that they've needed Democratic votes in the past.
Just to be specific about it, there are quite a
few Republican congressmen who and people who have never voted
for one of these continuing resolutions, even with larger majorities
than they have now, they've always had to go to Democrats.
Given that direct linkage that you're making with Elon Musk's
(04:58):
unpopularity with Democrats and the need to get some Democrat votes,
do you get the sense that they're going to link
the two in any way, that they're trying to put
some restraint on Doze or on President Trump more generally
in return for that support, or would that be too
explicit for them.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
No, that's exactly the question that I've been asking, and
the feedback I've gotten has been twofold. On the one hand,
there's the obvious worry, which you've mentioned, that how can
we have assurance that any deal we strike won't immediately
be torn apart or ignored by Musk? The question I've
been asking is would you actually write legislative language into
(05:34):
an agreement saying Elon Musk cannot cut this agency? Or
perhaps Trump could do what's called a presidential signing statement.
George W. Bush used to do these a lot, that
would specify his intentions for what a bill means and
how it should be interpreted. To guard it against Elon Musk,
There's got to be some kind of an assurance from
Democrats that the deal they agree to is going to
(05:55):
withstand Doge's attacks. But then the other factor in all
of this is that the Democratic Party is very unpopular.
It's favorability rating is something like in the mid thirties,
and so there's a lot of pressure on Democratic lawmakers
from Democratic voters not to simply roll over and enable
Trump and Republicans to continue what they view as an
(06:17):
assault on government. So there are a lot of forces,
I think, behind the scenes that are pushing the two
sides toward what looks to me to be a pretty
high chance of a government shutdown.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
I guess, just to be clear, everyone in Congress is
pretty unpopular, right. The Republicans in Congress are not super popular,
or you would say, you think specifically as the Democrats.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
I think the Democrats right now are more unpopular. I
saw Paul the other day that had Democrats running about
twenty points behind, I think, in popularity behind Republicans. When
Donald Trump even got a bit of a honeymoon, he
had higher favorability ratings and unfavorability he rings for the
first month or so of his presidency. But it's the
view of Democrats among their own voters that is so
(06:56):
worrisome to Democratic elected officials because they need this support
in order to stay in their jobs, and they're very
alert and attuned to the dissatisfaction in the Democratic base.
And that too is a factor that's going to play
into what Democrats are and aren't willing to agree on
when it comes to cutting it spending deal with the Republicans.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Okay, Joss, I might make you do a lot of work.
I have one more question. Go on to something else,
but I am interested. Do you think that doge has
changed the politics of a shutdown because we don't normally
talk about federal workers very much except if there's a shutdown,
But I feel like we spent the last two or
three weeks reading loads of stories about federal workers debating
whether they're all useless, or whether any of them are
(07:35):
really important. Do you think that maybe President Trump will
be less frightened of a shutdown in this context? Will
it just sort of muddy the waters around Doge.
Speaker 1 (07:44):
They're eager to test the proposition that the government really
doesn't need all these employees to function on it, so
I think there would be some appetite for a shutdown.
The danger with that is that in the past, Republicans
have gone into shutdowns saying, Oh, this isn't going to
be a big deal, it will be fine, the government
can cont you to run. In my view, we had
a test to that back during the first Trump administration
(08:04):
in twenty eighteen and twenty nineteen, when Republicans allowed a
shutdown to occur because Trump wanted to secure immediate funding
for a border wall, and the shutdown lasted thirty five days. Eventually,
there was a lot of blowback from ordinary Americans, and
Trump ended up agreeing to reopen the government without having
(08:24):
secured that funding. Republicans and Trump lost that shutdown because
the political pressure became too much for them to bear.
I think the longer a shutdown goes on, regardless of
how excited Republicans might be in the front end of that.
The political pressure on them to get the government running
again is only going to increase. Elon Musk may not care,
a lot of Republicans eager to fire government workers may
(08:47):
not care. But at the end of the day, Republican
elected officials want to keep their jobs and Trump wants
to maintain his popularity, and it's very hard for me
to see how they would be able to do that
over an extended government shutdown.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
I can be come back to a bit later, because
I do want to think about the implications for doge
itself and their activities if the government shuts down. But first,
I mean, we've had a lot of politics, which is
only occasionally allowed on Trumponomics, But I wanted to also
think about some of the numbers involved here, and specifically
have a quick think about whether all these firings and
scary emails and all the fire smoke coming out of
(09:22):
federal government thanks to DOGE, has actually produced a lot
of savings for the US taxpayer. So Laura, you and
your team keep a close eye on all this. And
I see that DOGE itself has claimed recently that it's
already found fifty five billion dollars worth of savings. Now,
our chief economy is pointed out, and a woe pointed
out on this show not long ago that you'd need
(09:42):
around eight times that you'd need more like four hundred
billion to really make a dent on the US borrowing trajectory.
But still in just a few weeks, fifty five billion
would be pretty impressive. Is it true so far?
Speaker 3 (09:56):
No, And they actually recently updated that number just sixty
five billion, But we still have seen their accounting of
how they got there.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So in the last few days it's gone up from
fifty five to sixty five.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
Yes, but the underlying sort of accounting doesn't bear that out.
Doge has really made this claim that they are the
most transparent agency out there, that they are doing this
all in public view. For the first couple weeks, what
this really was was just an x account just posting, hey,
we canceled this contract. We canceled that contract. In the
past week or so, they have put this all on
(10:26):
a Doze website and basically listed here are all the
contracts that we have canceled. If you go through there's
an At this point, I had a couple thousand there
when we did the math last week on this There
were about sixteen billion dollars worth of contracts listed there. However,
there was one that doesn't add up to the fifty
five billion that they were claiming at the top line.
And then once you dug down into these contracts, we
(10:48):
found one pretty major error that showed an eight billion
dollar contract that was actually an eight million dollar contract.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
That's the kind of a state you make when you're
the richest man in the world and you're just constantly
getting your millions and billions mixed up.
Speaker 3 (11:00):
But truly, as you mentioned, that doesn't really move the dial,
but it showed and caused a lot of called into
a question Doge and how transparent they are being. Actually,
they've accounted for about eight billion dollars worth of savings.
That's not that much here at Bloomberg when we're talking
about tax policies, we sometimes don't even really start talking
about them ntill they're about one hundred billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
Get out of bed for less than a few billions.
Speaker 3 (11:22):
Other other colleagues have noted for various tax savings that
in this bill that Republicans are looking to pass later
this year. Elon Musk personally could benefit by hundreds of
billions of dollars. So the fact that his group is
only saving eight billion dollars really just goes to show
just how they're barely denting the surface.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
And it's weird. I mean that particular example, the million
billion one. I mean, we joke around it, but actually
it's also one of those ones where it's just on
its face it's mad. You sort of wonder, how if
you just tell us a bit more about the detail
of what the claim is in terms of how this
contract would be bigger than anything that this company has
had anything to do with ever.
Speaker 3 (11:59):
Yes, so this was a contractor that's out in a
Washington suburb. Their average contract going back was about a
million dollars, so this having an eight billion dollar contract
would just be wildly out of proportion.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
And it is a DEI contract, right of course you
want to claim that you were wasting lots and lots
of money on DEI.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
Yes, And even for the agency this contract was going through,
their entire budget was only about nine billion dollars. So
the fact that they would have one single contract being
eight billion on DEI just doesn't stand up.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
And it was eight million.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
It was for eight million. The other thing that was
really called into question even of Okay, say you make
that accounting change, you have eight billion dollars in which
in what they say they've saved, all of these contracts
that are listed basically have a maximum value, and that
doesn't mean that top line number is actually what's spent,
So that eight billion dollars is probably actually much less
after you go through a discount all of these contracts
(12:47):
across the board. Doe just quick to point out that, look,
this doesn't account for all of the the leases that
we've canceled, all the personnel that we have pulled from
the federal government roles. But even still, even if you
give a very generous estimate to all of those, were
still just talking a couple more billion dollars here and there.
This claim that Musk started with a two trillion dollar
goal of cutting two trillion dollars from the federal deficit.
(13:08):
He's now decreased that to one trillion. So the goalposts
really keep moving here, just week by week.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
I guess you could say he's providing the open goal
by making all this transparent on the website, Given that
a lot of people seem to be quite happy to
take at face value that claims he's been making on x.
I guess they deserve some credit for the transparency of
the website, especially if it means we find all these
errors and we can constantly criticize them.
Speaker 3 (13:31):
The other criticism, though, is that there's really not a
lot of transparency requirements for DOGE. It is not a
department as all the other Department of Homeland Security. It's
really just an office within the White House. Musk himself
doesn't have to disclose his finances publicly. They also don't
have the same sort of scrutiny from a watchdog or
an inspector general that would have the same sort of oversight.
They don't have to report who the people are. There's
(13:52):
questions of are these doze kids, as they've been called,
going to these different agencies, a lot of them very young.
Have they completed their ethics training, the t training. There's
been some cases we've reported on lapses there that have
cropped up. So they really aren't subject to the same
hiring practices and scrutiny as any other of the federal
workers that they're going in and auditing.
Speaker 2 (14:10):
And to your point about the website, they don't seem
to have done a lot of basic arithmesy. This actually
takes us that the status of DOGE and the fact
that it's not subject to a lot of these things,
actually raises this much intriguing question of what happens to
DOGE efforts themselves in the case of a government shutdown,
And mean, I go back to you, Josh, what's your
(14:31):
sense would we consider the DOGE effort to now be
enough part of the federal government that all of its
people have to go home? Or would it the counter's
essential workers it's essential to be cutting the government even
as you shut it down.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
Yeah, it's a great question. That's one that Democrats and
Republicans have started to ask themselves. I spent yesterday talking
to a couple of House and Senate staffers just asking
the basic question, would DOGE be allowed to continue operating
in a government shutdown? There isn't a clear answer, but
the general sense that I got was that staffers both
in the House and Senate think that it probably would
be because the president does have a lot of leeway
(15:07):
to declare certain workers essential to the government. And so,
as one Democratic House staffer put it to me, I
don't think DOGE would even pause, I did get an
interesting illustration of the way that presidents used this power
to manipulate public opinion. And I think it might come
into play with Trump and Doze if there is a
government shutdown. Back in twenty thirteen, when Barack Obama was president,
(15:28):
there was a shutdown and Obama shut the National Parks down,
and Republicans got very angry about that because they said,
Obama has the power to keep this open. He's doing
this for political purposes to get people mad at Republicans.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
And he was compliance right, yeah, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1 (15:43):
But then during the twenty eighteen government shutdown when Trump
was president, Trump made a point of keeping a bunch
of stuff open, including the National Parks, in order to
underscore the argument that shutdowns aren't that bad and it
wasn't his fault when things got messed up during a shutdown.
Think if you flip that around and put it in
a Doze context, Trump, I don't see why Trump couldn't
(16:05):
argue that Doze are essential workers. They're actually helping to
balance the budget by continuing to kind of fire people
and do these things at Trump and Musk think is
so important. And I don't know what power Democrats would
have to stop them. So while we don't have a
clear and definitive answer yet, the assumption among people I
talked to on the Hill is that DOGE probably would
be able to continue operating in a shutdown.
Speaker 3 (16:26):
There's a lot of thought also with the DOGE that
a shutdown would actually be very beneficial because they wouldn't
be encumbered by all of the career staff that would
be in the office. They've run into lots of issues
where they want to access a data set, they want
access to certain files, and the staff that's there says no. Suddenly,
if you remove all those people from the building for
an extended period of time, DOGE has a lot more
leeway to just run roughshot and grab what they want.
Speaker 2 (16:49):
So you've raised the other sort of big question out
of all this. I started off asking where Republicans now
be less scared of a shutdown? Well, Democrats actually wonder
about really concerned about the federal government. Should they be
pretty concerned about shutdown?
Speaker 1 (17:03):
If you guys are right, it's a good question. I
think everybody's trying to figure this out. The impression I
have in talking to Democrats is that they're just very
frustrated with the way all this is going, and so
I don't imagine that a lot of them are going
to be eager to just keep things rolling along. There's
certainly an appetite among at least some Democratic staffers that
(17:23):
I've talked to, that Trump just needs to get a
taste of his own medicine, and he wants to shut
the government down. Let's go ahead and do it, and
let him deal with all the political blowback that happens
as a result of that. But one other thing I
think is worth mentioning is, and this is a concern
among Democrats I spoke to, is that there is a
lot of fear of what could doje in musk do
(17:44):
during a shutdown if they were allowed to continue operating.
And one particular area of concern is the treasury payment system.
There's been talk in the past among Republicans that a
shutdown wouldn't be so bad because they could sort of
decide which bills to pay and which bills not to
pay and keep things rolling for a long time. So
you't government wouldn't default on treasury bonds, but it might
(18:05):
shut down other payments. That is something that a lot
of people view is very dangerous. To the market, to
global markets if there were a shutdown. We now know
that the dose folks do have access to a lot
of these payment systems. Nobody really knows what could happen,
what kind of mishift they could get up to, if
this kind of scenario were to unfold.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
I guess we should say at this point it's got best.
We've interviewed a couple of times in Bloomberg in the
last couple of weeks. He comes from Wall Street. He's
been very clear that this is we're all getting ahead
of ourselves in worrying about specifically those functions and the
running of the treasury market. He thinks all of that
is hysterical. I think what you stated in terms of
the possible leavers they would have and the lack of
(18:47):
clarity we would have in the vent of a shutdown,
I think is all true. But we should say there
is supposedly someone who cares about these things sitting inside
fifteen hundred Pennsylvania Avenue that the Treasury Department. I guess
one last question is just goes back to this broader environment,
the rather febrile environment we have. If we have a shutdown,
(19:09):
rightly or wrongly, is it seem to be the sort
of defining battle between Congress and the executive This sort
of ongoing tussle we've had with President Trump over who
actually controls the power of the purse, who can control
whether to actually spend money or not. You were hinting
at it just now, Josh. Is this how it's going
to come to a head, perhaps even more than all
(19:29):
the court orders and all the cases that have gone out.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
I really don't know. I mean, right now, there's not
a lot of contention between Trump Doge and House Republicans,
Trump's own cabinet secretaries. Republicans in Congress have basically been
willing to let Trump and Musk operate as they wish.
At some point, maybe that battle comes to a head
and it becomes more visible, more publicly contentious. I just
(19:56):
don't know the answer of the question yet.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
I'd say we've just seen a glimmer of the sort
of fissures starting to form between Trump allies and Musk.
This really came to a head in this email that
went out over the weekend where Musk said, every federal worker,
send in five bullet points of what you've been doing
over the past week. This caused a lot of alarm,
ruined a lot of Cabinet secretary's weekends as they were
(20:18):
trying to figure out how to respond to this, and
a lot of agencies said ignore it, do not reply,
will handle this. Musk late last night got upset over
this and said, Okay, if you didn't reply this time, fine,
but we're going to send another email, and this time
you have to reply or else you'll be fired. This
runs in contrast of all of the guidance that both
agency heads have given, and these are Trump hand picked
(20:39):
people to run these places, as well as OPM with
the Office of Personnel Management or the HR for the
federal government. So we're starting to see this power struggle forming.
We'll see where we are. The shutdown is, if it happens,
is about fifteen days away. A lot can happen between
now and then.
Speaker 2 (20:55):
Yeah, we talk about the battle between different arms of government,
Congress and the White House, but if it's between Elon
Musk and everyone else, that's what seems to be coming
down to Laura occurs to me, you're not even I
think when you're on shutdown, you're not even allowed to
check your emails. So I guess he is if he
does get if we do get shut down, Elon Musk
is not going to be able to send a lot
(21:16):
more emails to federal workers that they're supposed to reply
to within a day or whatever.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
That would be a key point that would harm his
strategy here of they would say, look, couldn't respond because
you didn't let me.
Speaker 2 (21:27):
All right, well, Josh Green and Laura Davison, thank you
very much. That was a great Thank you, Thanks so much,
thanks for listening to this episode of trump Andomics from Bloomberg.
It was hosted by me Stephanie Flanders, and I was
joined by Laura Davison and Josh Green. Trump Andomics is
(21:47):
produced by Samasadi and Moses and Dam with sound design
by Blake Maples. Brendan Francis Newnan is our executive producer
and please do rate and review us wherever you listen
to podcasts, so a lot more people can listening. Turning
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.