Geographic Decentralization Of Government Could Have Bipartisan Appeal

During a recent speech to the Economic Club of New York in which he outlined second term priorities, former President Donald Trump announced his intention to "create a government efficiency commission tasked with conducting a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government." Trump added that "as a first order of business, this commission will develop an action plan to totally eliminate fraud and improper payments within six months."

Trump added that he would like to put Elon Musk in charge of the proposed efficiency commission, a role for which Musk has reportedly volunteered. Since Trump unveiled the idea, Musk has touted the prospective commission on X as the "Department of Government Efficiency."

In praising Trump's proposed government efficiency commission, the Wall Street Journal editorial board described Musk as well suited to lead the venture, noting that "Space X has demonstrated how a private business can do better than NASA in sending rockets into space." What's more, the WSJ points out how Musk has "seen the waste and inefficiency of government first-hand, and he could no doubt call on many people from the private economy to help."

Trimming back federal government excess is a task that will provide a target-rich environment for Musk and his team, who are likely conclude that many departments and agencies should be scaled back or scrapped altogether. A Federal News Network survey released in April found only 6% of federal workers are in the office five days per week, while nearly 30% of the 6,338 federal employees who were surveyed were totally remote. As such, Musk may conclude that it's unwise for taxpayers to spend money on behemoth but nearly empty buildings occupying expensive real estate in Washington, D.C.

Given his demonstrated willingness to relocate large companies, Musk might conclude, as some sitting members of Congress have, that the federal government should be less physically centralized and that many federal departments and agencies should be moved from Washington, D.C. to other parts of the U.S., as occurred when the Bureau of Land Management was moved from Washington to Grand Junction, Colo. during the Trump administration. The BLM's move to Colorado has since been reversed by President Joe Biden, but it is expected to be reinstated if Trump wins in November. What's more, legislation has been introduced in Congress that, if approved, would go beyond the BLM, moving many other parts of the federal government outside of Washington.

Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) have introduced legislation that would relocate much of the federal workforce away from Washington to economically distressed parts of the U.S. That bill, the Helping Infrastructure Restore the Economy (HIRE) Act , would move 90% of workers at 10 executive branch departments to other parts of the U.S.

There is evidence that, with White House support, the HIRE Act or an updated version of it, could garner bipartisan support. When campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination, Andrew Yang endorsed relocation of federal departments, with his website stating that centralization of the federal workforce in Washington "has created a federal government that often feels divorced from large segments of the population."

Yang's sentiment has been echoed by progressive writer Matt Yglesias, who called for "taking a good hard look at whether so much federal activity needs to be concentrated in Washington, DC, and its suburbs." Yglesias noted how relocation of federal agencies and departments would bring more than just the associated government jobs with them. Geographic diversification of the federal workforce would also lead to dispersal of jobs indirectly connected to federal departments.

"Each of these regulatory agencies is surrounded by a swarm of highly paid lawyers, economists, and lobbyists who make careers out of influencing their decisions," Yglesias noted. "Right now, those folks all live in the DC metro area, where they drive up the cost of already expensive housing. Their spending would do a lot more good in Detroit, Milwaukee, or Cincinnati, where they would create secondary jobs and bolster a larger regional economy."

Ideas For Reining In The Unsustainable Trajectory Of Federal Spending

In addition to decentralizing the federal workforce, a Musk-led department of government efficiency might consider recreating an updated version of the anti-appropriations committee that was used to wind down federal spending in the aftermath of World War II. Led by Senator Harry Byrd (D-Va.), the anti-appropriations committee, often referred to as the "Byrd Committee," was responsible for reducing federal spending by tens of billions in inflation adjusted dollars. Those savings were achieved, in part, through the elimination of Depression-era make-work programs like the Civilian Conservation Corps and the Work Progress Administration.

As with physical decentralization of the federal government, there are already some in Congress who see the value in creating a modern day anti-appropriations committee. Congressman Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) has introduced the Finding Federal Savings Committee Resolution, which he touts as a "modeled after the post-World War II era Anti-Appropriations Committee" that will "recommend the modification or elimination of underperforming and nonessential federal programs." If authorized, Obernolte believes the committee "would significantly decrease federal spending by reducing the size of the federal government while streamlining the mammoth federal bureaucracy."

"Over the past several years, the size of the federal government, and therefore also our national debt, has grown tremendously. It is imperative that we take immediate action to lower federal spending and bring our debt under control to stabilize our economy and put our country back on track," Rep. Obernolte said when reintroducing his bill in 2023. "My bill creates a bipartisan committee that will help to identify and subsequently modify or eliminate federal programs that are duplicative or just aren't working, trimming the fat of the federal bureaucracy and ensuring taxpayer dollars are spent where they are most effective."

While Musk has firsthand experience in dealing with various instances of federal inefficiency, he also has data on his side documenting how the federal government's fiscal challenge is not insufficient revenue, but overspending. In fact, in the decade from 2014 to 2023, federal government spending grew by 81.7%, far beyond that period's 23.3% rate of population growth plus inflation. Had federal spending grown in line with population growth plus inflation over the past decade, the federal budget would be $2.1 trillion lower than it is today.

A government efficiency commission, or anyone else seeking to reduce federal expenditures, will find a number of ideas out there, some of which have already been introduced as legislation. Some ideas for reining in government spending, like the anti-appropriations committee, have been tried before and proven effective. Other proposals, such as move federal departments and agencies away from Washington, would involve breaking new ground.

Musk, arguably more than anyone else on the planet, has experience in breaking new ground. Meanwhile Trump, with his relocation of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and the BLM to Colorado, has demonstrated a willingness to relocate and geographically redistribute parts of the federal government, even in the face of vehement opposition. Depending on the results of the 2024 election, by January of next year geographic diversification of the federal government may be an idea whose time has come.