No. No. No. Punitive processes make narrowly targeted programs *less* efficient and *more* costly. Because more scrutiny requires more bureaucracy. Punitive processes also make it *less* likely that people will get aid for which they qualify. Because of the roadblocks and stigma scrutiny creates.

Want more affordability? Build more housing! Housing markets are complex. There are many confounding factors at play beyond simple supply and demand, but the research is clear. More supply is needed to make housing more affordable in the midst of our regional housing shortage. 1/4

Giving money directly to people in poverty can boost local economies 2.5x GiveDirectly.org/multiplier 🧵

@darthbluesky.bsky.social www.nytimes.com/2025/10/08/m...

What happens when a team turns a failure into a dramatic success? Sometimes, their hard work and courage earn them a GAO nastygram. That's because the GAO holds them accountable to the wrong operating model. www.eatingpolicy.com/p/gao-gets-s...

See how government teams across America are modernizing the way they serve their communities through digital services 🏛️✨ www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQtz...

“Like their four-year counterparts, community colleges are grappling with disappearing federal grants, shuttered D.E.I. offices, eliminated programs… many of the grants that fund financial aid for low-income students and the staff that support them have been eliminated or threatened”

Before there was DOGE, there was civic tech, an Obama-era movement to try to improve government with technology. Now DOGE has taken over not only key civic tech teams like USDS, but also the message of govt modernization. Here's a story about what's next tinyurl.com/yhrz43ut

LOL, my rep, Tom Kean, Jr. (NJ-7) is one of these brave patriots who are "deeply concerned" about the bill he voted for.

@donmoyn.bsky.social details the huge gap between the practices of responsible, effective civic tech and the wreckage caused by the hubris of DOGE. I lived this myself during my time at the US Digital Service, pre- and post-DOGE.

This is a really great real time demonstration that a) there is very little fraud in most government services, and b) building systems around fraud paranoia has real costs for the vast majority of users. (Also follow @almsnatalie.bsky.social for great govt coverage) www.nextgov.com/digital-gove...

The DOGE vision for government technology involves centralizing Americans’ private data. But this isn’t a new idea: it’s one that has been considered, reconsidered, and left alone many times over the years—for good reasons.

This should be enlightening --- and fun!

Wow! Thanks to your support, we just crossed 14,000 followers. 😍 How about this? Help us get to 15,000 and we'll do an AMA for you.

Beautifully stated.

The literal opposite of the goals of civic tech

Fwiw one thing university faculty can do is provide simple explainers for their students on how federal funding works and how cuts to higher ed & endowment taxes will concretely damage their education and possibly spike tuition costs Many students don’t know how university finances work!

This is flatly illegal. The plain text of the law says that any person who works for any 501(c)(3) nonprofit is eligible. There is ZERO authority for limiting eligibility based on the work such nonprofit does. They WILL lose the lawsuit. Even so, this is making so many people’s lives harder.

💪❤️🦀

Such great talent, wantonly dismissed. An intentional hollowing out of effective government.

🥰🙏 I don't promote my book as much now that I work in government, but I did write one & I believe it's still pretty useful as we enter a time of major shifts & messy information in both government & tech www.goodreads.com/book/show/55...

Another media outlet’s account of this significant ruling in the federal court in Arkansas.

This is a great victory. Thanks for spearheading the fight, @dncoulter.bsky.social!

Good government digital services are possible. But they take time, expertise, and dedicated public servants. (Among other things, for sure.)