Upon his return to the White House, President Donald Trump has made it abundantly clear what his administration aims to tackle: the sprawling issue of federal waste. It’s a topic that’s been at the heart of many political debates, and one that begs the question: how do we ensure taxpayer money is used judiciously? The President, with his characteristic resolve, has embarked on what he describes as a crusade against wasteful spending.
The administration took a notable step forward by establishing the Department of Government Efficiency, humorously abbreviated as DOGE. The decision to appoint the pragmatic and visionary entrepreneur Elon Musk—born far from the White House in the vibrant landscapes of South Africa—was both bold and intriguing. Musk, a billionaire touched by both sunshine and starlight, has been tasked with the monumental job of scrutinizing federal expenditures, chaff and all, to separate necessary investments from financial frivolity.
Musk’s department made headlines earlier this year by halting a project poised to provide tax policy advice to the nation of Liberia. It’s a move that drew mixed reactions. Was it a prudent pullback, or an error in diplomatic judgment?
On the 4th of March, 2024, inside the hallowed halls of Congress, President Trump didn’t hold back when expressing his gratitude to Musk. “Thank you, Elon, you’re working very hard. He didn’t need this, he didn’t need this, thank you very much. We appreciate it. Everybody here, even this side, appreciates it, I believe. They just don’t want to admit that,” the President remarked with a touch of humor that managed to spark a smirk even across the aisle.
The President’s focus was sharp, akin to a laser, zeroing in on the wastage and perceived fraudulent activities buried within the behemoth of government spending. One of the discoveries of this investigation unveiled funding towards an LGBTQ+ initiative in Lesotho, a country oftentimes overshadowed in global dialogues.
“Just listen to some of the appalling waste we have already identified,” announced the President, employing a grave tone that invited listeners to lean in closer.
Then, with a mix of incredulity and jest, he continued, “$8 million to promote LGBTQ+ in the African nation of Lesotho, which nobody has ever heard of.” His words bounced off the chamber walls, causing a ripple of reactions—some nodding in agreement, others shaking their heads in disbelief.
“And there’s more,” he added, “$60 million for indigenous peoples and Afro-Colombian empowerment in Central America. $60 million. $8 million for making mice transgender,” words delivered with a dry wit that drew chuckles from around the room, like a well-placed punchline.
As if flipping through a portfolio of unbridled extravagance, the President highlighted other projects—ones he firmly believed to be mismanaged endeavors.
“This is real. $10 million for male circumcision in Mozambique,” he asserted, causing a few to raise their eyebrows.
“$1.5 million for voter confidence in Liberia, $14 million for social cohesion in Mali,” he listed off methodically, letting the sums hang in the air like unraveling threads before a silent audience.
Perhaps most striking, he concluded with, “$250,000 to increase vegan local climate action innovation in Zambia, $42 million for social and behavior change in Uganda,” echoing the sheer scale of American generosity—or folly, depending on one’s perspective.
The President’s narrative offers a glimpse into the complexities of U.S. foreign aid, and poses an intellectual challenge: how do we determine what’s wasteful versus worthwhile? Much like any great debate, perspectives will vary, sparking inspiration or ire in equal measure.
