Trump is cheering Elon Musk now, but if anything goes wrong it will be the president’s problem
- Share via
- For six weeks, the world’s richest man has rampaged across the federal bureaucracy, cheered on by President Trump.
- But Trump and Elon Musk are planting political landmines across the government that could end up damaging them both.
WASHINGTON — For the last six weeks, President Trump’s demolition man Elon Musk has rampaged across the federal bureaucracy — freezing payments, firing workers and disabling entire agencies.
“We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper,” Musk bragged, referring to the foreign aid agency.
And Trump cheered him on. “Elon is doing a great job, but I would like to see him get more aggressive,” the president posted on social media in capital letters.
But Trump and Musk are planting political landmines across the government that could end up damaging them both.
Column: Trump says he wants to end Russia’s war on Ukraine. But he’s acting like Putin’s wingman
Trump claims he wants to end Russia’s war on Ukraine. But lasting peace will require helping Ukraine defend itself, and Trump has never agreed to that.
Many federal programs are intended to respond to disasters — or prevent them. Cut those programs and you increase the risk that small problems will turn into big ones.
I asked officials and management experts to help compile a list of possible side effects from Musk’s blitzkrieg. Here’s a sample:
Cutting the Food and Drug Administration could cripple the agency’s ability to trace foodborne illnesses back to the source, an important step in stopping their spread.
Slashing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could slow the agency’s ability to react to epidemics, like the measles outbreak in Texas that has infected at least 146 people and killed one child, the first U.S. measles death since 2015.
Firing Federal Aviation Administration technicians, as the Trump administration did in January, could make air transportation less safe or merely less reliable. Musk tweeted last week that the FAA’s air control communications system “is breaking down very rapidly [and] putting air traveler safety at serious risk.” (But take that with a grain of salt; he’s promoting his Starlink system as a replacement.)
Trump has been back in the White House for two weeks and is already remaking the federal government — and trying to create an imperial presidency.
Purging the FBI and CIA could weaken efforts to prevent terrorist attacks. FBI Director Kash Patel has said he wants to send every agent in his Washington headquarters to field offices to “be cops.” If he follows through, that would include many of the bureau’s top counterterrorism specialists.
Other possible effects from the government-wide chaos are less terrifying, but would still disrupt Americans’ lives.
If Musk’s technicians inadvertently insert errors in the government’s financial payment systems, Social Security checks could be interrupted, Medicare benefits disrupted, IRS tax refunds delayed.
Billionaire Elon Musk was the focus of many in Washington this week, as his Department of Government Efficiency slashed at the federal bureaucracy.
Officials also worry that confidential information could leak — not only taxpayers’ personal details, but classified data about intelligence or defense programs.
Musk’s layoffs are also likely to produce a massive brain drain, driving talented managers out of the civil service and discouraging young people from joining. That will make federal agencies less efficient, not more.
Thankfully, none of the worst-case scenarios has occurred. But any one of them could cause a political explosion that would damage Trump’s presidency.
The president may not recognize it, but he’s taking major risks — not only for the country, but for his standing with the public.
“We all love the idea of slashing the size of government,” said Donald F. Kettl, a public administration scholar at the University of Maryland. “But the more you cut back on government capacities, the more likely something will go wrong. And the instant it affects peoples’ lives — trouble with Social Security checks, problems with Medicare, having to worry about getting on an airplane — it becomes a political problem.”
Musk made the gestures during a giddy speech celebrating Trump’s return to power at a rally Monday at Capital One Arena in Washington. Many condemn the gestures, but not the ADL.
“Trump is playing with unexploded bombs here,” said Elaine Kamarck of the Brookings Institution. “By doing this in so many places across the government — and by cutting with an axe instead of a scalpel — you increase the possibility of a major f— up.”
Kamarck says just one highly visible management failure can sink a presidency. Think Hurricane Katrina under President George W. Bush, the Obamacare rollout under President Obama, the Afghanistan withdrawal under President Biden — or Trump’s chaotic initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Kamarck wrote a book about such disasters: “Why Presidents Fail.”
Trump has taken high-risk behavior in the Oval Office to a new level, she said.
“Other presidents took hits because they missed the signals when problems were developing,” she said. “This is the first president who actually created the problems himself.”
The public is already worried. A Reuters/IPSOS poll released Feb. 20 found that 58% of Americans said they were concerned that Social Security payments and other federal benefits could be delayed by Musk’s actions. A slightly larger number, 62%, said they do not support the freeze on federal grants and services that Musk’s team imposed.
As Kamarck found, presidents often get blamed for disasters they didn’t cause directly. “Obama didn’t design the Obamacare website that crashed, but he set up the system that produced it,” she noted.
Whether or not a president deserves it, politicians in the other party can be relied on to blame him. When a bungled FDA inspection led to a shortage of baby formula in 2022, Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York said the root cause was “Joe Biden’s failed leadership.”
Trump critics have already warned that they will hold the president accountable if a disaster occurs on his watch.
“If there’s a terrorist attack in this country over the next four years, and he’s put someone who is judged to not be qualified in as the director of the FBI, then that blood is going to be on his hands,” former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican, said last year.
If any of the problems on that list do occur, it will only be natural for the public to ask whether Trump and Musk were responsible. It will also be natural for reporters to investigate whether Musk’s actions played a part.
Trump might be tempted to pin responsibility on Musk and his young cyberwarriors, but it’s too late for that. He’s spent the last six weeks publicly cheering Musk’s actions and urging him to do more.
“It’s his mess now,” Kamarck said.
Let’s hope no disasters materialize. But if any of them do, Trump will learn the meaning of what then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell called the Pottery Barn rule: You break it, you own it.
A personal note: This will be my last weekly column for The Times. I’m grateful to the many readers who have given me part of their time over the last 16 years of columnizing — even, and sometimes especially, the ones who told me politely when I was wrong.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following content is AI-generated and was not created by the editorial staff of the Los Angeles Times.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- The article argues that President Trump’s support for Elon Musk’s aggressive federal workforce reductions and agency shutdowns risks destabilizing critical government functions, such as food safety inspections, disease outbreak responses, and air travel safety[1][4][5]. Experts warn that indiscriminate cuts could lead to delayed Social Security payments, Medicare disruptions, and leaks of sensitive data, eroding public trust in government[5][6].
- Critics highlight that Musk’s layoffs and hiring freezes may trigger a “brain drain,” driving skilled civil servants out of government and discouraging new talent from joining, ultimately reducing agencies’ efficiency[1][5]. Public opinion polls cited in the article show 58% of Americans worry about benefit delays, while 62% oppose Musk’s federal service freeze[5][6].
- The author draws parallels to past presidential failures, such as Hurricane Katrina and the Obamacare rollout, suggesting that Trump’s embrace of Musk’s “chainsaw” approach increases the likelihood of a catastrophic administrative breakdown that could politically backfire[5][6].
Other views on the topic
- Supporters of Musk’s reforms argue that reducing federal bureaucracy aligns with Trump’s mandate to shrink government overreach, emphasizing that the Constitution vests executive power in elected leaders, not an “autonomous” civil service[1][3]. Musk has framed the cuts as necessary to address a $2 trillion deficit, claiming unchecked spending risks national bankruptcy[3][5].
- The Trump administration defends workforce reductions as targeting inefficiency, alleging “hundreds of billions in fraud” from nonexistent employees and redundant programs[5]. Initiatives like the “deferred resignation program” aim to streamline operations, with exemptions for national security and law enforcement roles[1][3].
- Proponents contend that closing agencies like USAID redirects resources to domestic priorities, though critics note this has halted aid to conflict zones and health programs, risking global instability[2][4][6]. Musk and Trump argue that private-sector accountability measures, such as requiring employees to justify their work, mirror corporate best practices[5].
Sign up for Essential California
The most important California stories and recommendations in your inbox every morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
