Czars, Advisers and a New Department of Government Efficiency
Vivek Ramaswamy speaks before Donald Trump takes the stage at the campaign rally at Madison Square Garden on Oct. 27, 2024 in New York City.
President-elect Donald Trump this week announced his intention to create a Department of Government Efficiency during his second term – a move that left more questions than it did answers.
The department, which Trump said would “provide advice and guidance from outside of government,” will be led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.
The announcement highlights a way for Trump to surround himself with voices who could have struggled to gain Senate approval if nominated for a Cabinet-level post but will now have a certain level of access and influence over the White House and its policies.
Musk and Ramaswamy aren’t the only ones possibly benefiting from the strategy. Trump has repeatedly said that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a well-known vaccine skeptic, will play a role in his administration, with Kennedy saying he will be tasked with reorganizing agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and more. He has said that “entire departments” within the FDA “have to go.”
Trump has also asked Thomas Homan to serve as his “border czar.”
Czars and advisers are not new or unique to the Trump White House, it should be noted. The use of czars in the White House dates back at least to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, if not earlier. Sometimes the designation can formally come from the White House, sometimes it can be informally designated by the press. Sometimes it can even be used for political purposes – as Republicans did to Vice President Kamala Harris when they ascribed to her the position of “border czar” during the 2024 presidential campaign.
Notable czars over the years include an AIDS czar under President Bill Clinton, an Asian carp czar under President Barack Obama, a bird flu czar under President George W. Bush and a COVID-19 czar under President Joe Biden.
Such positions have no obligation to report to the Congress if they are called upon to testify, unlike a Senate-confirmed post.
But if these positions aren’t approved by the Senate, what kind of power do they wield? And will they complement or conflict with the heads of agencies they are empowered to examine?
“The White House advisers don't really have independent power. They have the power of what the president wants to do, but they still need to work very closely with agencies if they're actually going to accomplish anything,” says Ann Carlson, an environmental law expert at UCLA School of Law.
Still, big promises have already been made. Musk, for example, pledged to help Trump cut $2 trillion from the federal budget. And Kennedy said that he would fire 600 employees at the National Institutes of Health and bring in 600 new ones on the second day of the Trump administration.
READ:
Trump’s Looming Deportation PlanExperts are wary of such pledges.
“With respect to the Elon Musk efficiency role, obviously, he can't cut regulations,” Carlson says. “He can't cut the budget. He can only make recommendations. And in a lot of cases, those recommendations would need to be implemented by Congress – not by agencies.”
And for Kennedy’s promise? “It's not easy to fire civil servants,” says Susan Dudley, founder of the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center.
“I don't know how anybody could fire 600 people and replace them with 600 new ones – but certainly not an outside adviser,” Dudley says.
The major goals of the new Department of Government Efficiency include slashing “excess” regulations, cutting “wasteful” expenditures and restructuring federal agencies, according to Trump.
When it comes to policy changes and de-regulation, there are obvious barriers to what a Trump administration can do – two of them being the rule-making process and the courts.
“If it's studying a problem, making recommendations, that's one thing,” says Roger Nober, director of the Regulatory Studies Center. “But then the recommendations to be implemented would have to go through the normal checks and balances any other government action would do.”
However, the use of advisers and departments outside of government could make it more difficult to trace the exact origin of a proposal.
“Policies, once they're implemented through regulation or other things, there needs to be strong justifications for them,” Dudley says. “And they can be litigated if there aren't, but the way that they are created can be less transparent and accountable.”
Comments
Post a Comment