President-elect Donald Trump’s “Department of Government Efficiency” is neither a real department, nor particularly efficient, with two co-leaders of the still-to-form effort in Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.
The goofy name and wonky structure haven’t kept the prospect of DOGE from igniting real anxiety in Washington and beyond as Musk and Ramaswamy have floated a slew of cost-cutting ideas to deliver on Musk’s promise to chop $2 trillion from the $6.1 trillion annual federal budget.
The two were on Capitol Hill on Thursday for their first meetings with lawmakers, including the House DOGE point person, Georgia’s U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Coming out of the House meeting, U.S. Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) told reporters, “We’re going to gut the fish.”
Gutting the fish could mean a lot of things, and who could seriously argue that the federal government couldn’t use a haircut? In the weeks before Thursday’s meetings, Ramaswamy suggested that ending work-from-home perks for federal employees could shed 25% of the federal workforce alone, while an X account for the DOGE has pointed out easy-to-eliminate spending, like $2 million for Super Bowl ads for the U.S. Census, or $100,000 to study whether tequila or gin makes sunfish more aggressive.
But Musk had his own, much bigger target last week — the Pentagon’s F-35, the next-generation stealth fighter jet that is also the most expensive weapon program in U.S. history. In a series of posts to his X social media platform, Musk called the jets “obsolete in the age of drones” and said they only get pilots killed. “Please, in the name of all that is holy, let us stop the worst military value for money in history that is the F-35 program!” he wrote.
Putting a finer point on it, Musk posted a video of a Chinese drone swarm with the caption, “Meanwhile, some idiots are still building manned fighter jets like the F-35.”
Those “idiots” are the people at Lockheed Martin, which is now headquartered in Texas, but continues to have a huge Marietta presence, including a manufacturing facility for the F-35. Further south, U.S. Sen. Jon Ossoff and the Air Force recently announced Moody Air Force Base in Valdosta will become the home to two active duty F-35A fighter squadrons in 2029. That news was crucial for the base after the announcement that the Air Force will retire Moody’s current A-10 Warthog mission by 2028.
According to Lockheed, Georgia has 29 F-35 suppliers altogether, which adds up to 3,500 direct and indirect jobs, with an estimated economic impact of $671 million from the plane.
Georgia is hardly unique in its connection to the F-35. In fact, there may be no better example of “How Washington Works” than the aircraft, which has been sold to not just the Air Force, Navy and Marines, but also to more than a dozen U.S. allies across the globe. By strategically spreading manufacturing for the plane across all 50 states, except Alaska (a handy map from Lockheed even lets you see how much each state gets from making the jet), Lockheed has ensured that everybody in Congress has something to lose if the F-35 program were ever to be reduced or eliminated. In Georgia’s case, it would be a lot.
It’s hard to believe a social media post from a billionaire could really rewrite the Pentagon’s manned-aircraft operations. But no one has been a more visible part of Trump’s inner circle since the election than Musk. And it’s clear that Trump chose Musk and Ramaswamy for the DOGE job specifically because they’re not wedded to “How Washington Works.”
All of the noise has defense lobbyists preparing for what one predicted could be “a hell of a fight” to keep the F-35 going at its current rate. But a big part of the fight could be among Republicans themselves.
When I asked Greene’s office if the F-35 is on her radar, so to speak, as she rolled out her DOGE subcommittee, her spokesperson told me, “All government programs will be analyzed. Congresswoman Greene will be focused on waste, fraud and abuse and providing solutions to make the government more efficient for its customer, the American taxpayer.”
But Tifton-based Republican U.S. Rep. Austin Scott, a defense specialist on the House Armed Services Committee who helped land the F-35 mission for Moody, called the F-35 “the most advanced weapons system in the world.”
“It gives the United States and our allies air dominance in any fight, and we will not give up air dominance,” Scott said in a statement Thursday.
U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock, who has championed the F-35, said in a statement to the AJC that he’s “always ready” to work across the aisle to make government more efficient and spend taxpayer dollars wisely, “But threatening the future of the F-35 program at Moody AFB undermines our national security and would only benefit our adversaries who cannot compete with this jet, as well as threaten the lives of servicemembers who rely on it.”
That’s a far cry from what Musk is saying. After a declassified Pentagon report revealed shortcomings in the “overall reliability, maintainability and availability” of the F-35 following six years of combat testing, Musk called it “an expensive & complex jack of all trades, master of none.”
It all raises serious questions about how the incoming Trump administration will make decisions about federal spending and priorities. Chief among those questions is whether Musk, whose SpaceX company competes directly with Lockheed for space operations, should really get to upend the future of American warfare with a single post on his social media platform. Also, what counts as “waste and abuse” and who gets to decide?
It seems like Trump has already decided the EV tax credits that boost electric vehicles made in Georgia are wasteful. How about the $6.6 billion loan the Biden administration just advanced for Rivian to build its factory east of Atlanta? Is emergency disaster assistance for Hurricane Helene a good use of tax dollars? Some Washington Republicans aren’t so sure.
Georgians voted to put Trump back in the White House, in part because of his promises on the economy and spending. But what exactly that looks like, and who gets to decide, could mean billions in cuts for Georgia companies that few saw coming before Election Day.
About the Author
