loading . . . Weren’t most of the doge cuts already forecast in project 2025? The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) cuts, led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, share some overlap with the goals outlined in Project 2025, a conservative policy blueprint by the Heritage Foundation, but they aren't just a rehash. Both initiatives aim to shrink federal spending and bureaucracy, but DOGE's approach has been more chaotic and ideologically driven than Project 2025's structured plan. Project 2025 proposed specific cuts, like dismantling the Department of Education, slashing Medicaid funding, and reducing federal workforce by about a million employees through targeted reforms. It also suggested turning Medicaid into block grants and capping federal spending in various programs. DOGE, on the other hand, has taken a broader, less transparent approach, targeting agencies like USAID, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the Department of Education—many of which were also named in Project 2025. For instance, DOGE's elimination of USAID and cuts to Education align with Project 2025’s goals, but DOGE went further by abruptly shutting down entire agencies and firing tens of thousands of workers, often without clear justification or legal grounding. However, DOGE’s claimed savings—$180 billion as of June 2025—are riddled with errors and exaggerations. About 35% of these savings are unaccounted for, and some cuts, like a supposed $318 million contract cancellation, involved nonexistent contracts. Project 2025’s projections were ambitious but more methodically outlined, while DOGE’s execution has been criticized for lacking precision and inflating savings through misaccounting. While there’s overlap—nine of DOGE’s 15 targeted agencies were also in Project 2025’s crosshairs—DOGE’s cuts seem more opportunistic and less planned, driven by Musk’s and Ramaswamy’s personal ideologies rather than a cohesive strategy. Critics argue DOGE is "Project 2025 on steroids," amplifying its goals with less regard for legal or practical constraints. For example, DOGE’s mass firings and contract terminations, like the 260,000 civil servants let go, went beyond Project 2025’s scope, causing disruptions like purchasing bottlenecks and increased costs. So, while Project 2025 forecast some of the same agency downsizings and spending reductions, DOGE’s implementation has been messier, less accountable, and more aggressive, with outcomes that don’t always match the promised savings or efficiency. The two share a conservative vision, but DOGE’s reality is more about rapid disruption than following a pre-set forecast. https://x.com/i/grok/share/mhqvKfyGIsMU8Lm2BLRtCC0p2
