Elon Musk disclosed that audits conducted through the Department of Government Efficiency uncovered substantial government waste. The initiative identified what he termed "zombie payments" ranging from $100 billion to $200 billion annually. His comments represent the most detailed financial accounting of the short-lived program since its conclusion.
The revelations emerged during a podcast interview released Tuesday. Katie Miller, a former aide to the Trump administration, hosted the 53-minute conversation. The discussion covered multiple topics including immigration policy, artificial intelligence development, and Mars exploration plans. The episode appeared on X and accumulated over one million views within hours of publication.
Musk led the Department of Government Efficiency during the early months of Donald Trump's current administration. He departed from the position in May. The initiative sought to identify and eliminate wasteful government spending through a systematic review of federal payments and programs.
Origins and Structure of DOGE
The Department of Government Efficiency began as an informal concept. Musk explained that the organization emerged from online discussions rather than traditional government planning. An internet user suggested the name, creating an acronym that matched a popular internet meme.
"Doge was a made-up name," Musk stated during the interview. He noted the department essentially formed around crowdsourced ideas from the public. The unconventional approach reflected the administration's willingness to experiment with new government structures.
Despite its informal origins, DOGE conducted substantial audits of federal spending. The team reviewed payment systems across multiple agencies. Their analysis focused on identifying payments that continued without proper justification or oversight. These ongoing disbursements earned the label "zombie payments" due to their persistent nature despite lacking valid purpose.
Resistance and Political Pushback
Musk described significant obstacles during his tenure. Efforts to halt improper payments generated considerable opposition. He indicated that politically connected funding streams proved particularly difficult to address.
"We were somewhat successful," Musk acknowledged. "We stopped a lot of funding that really just made no sense." However, he emphasized that the challenges outweighed the accomplishments. Resistance from entrenched interests complicated attempts to implement recommended cuts.
The pushback came from various sources within government. Programs facing elimination often had established constituencies. Stakeholders defended existing funding arrangements regardless of efficiency concerns. This dynamic created friction between DOGE recommendations and practical implementation.
Musk expressed reluctance about repeating the experience. When asked if he would undertake similar work again, he responded negatively. "I think instead of doing DOGE, I would have basically worked on my companies," he said. The comment suggested the political difficulties exceeded his expectations.
