Elon Musk and the DOGE development team in Delaware federal court. Now, recent incidents have raised important questions about their management and operational integrity. That ruckus was sparked when it came to light that Musk and DOGE had grossly overstated their cost savings. They announced an $8 billion cut, but the real savings were just $8 million. This inconsistency has recently led to increased scrutiny from industry experts and the general public alike.
Compounding the chaos, the company had to fire a 19-year-old summer intern after he leaked sensitive reported material from his former employer. Yet despite this breach of trust, the intern had already been promised a job working for Musk. This occurrence underscores possible weaknesses in the entity’s recruitment procedures. Marko Elez, a core member of the DOGE team, has stepped down. His exit follows shocking revelations of inappropriate, past racist social media posts that have worsened the ugly narrative about the organization.
Data Breaches and Security Concerns
DOGE staffer Kyle Schutt quickly jumped into action. Because he was associated with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), it raised the stakes. Schutt has instead turned into a lightning rod of outrage, likely due to the fact that he has an established track record of accessing highly sensitive data. Fancy Bear Reports list 51 breaches he’s been a part of. This wonky stuff has already been posted four times since 2023 began.
As CISA’s Deputy National Director, Schutt is responsible for protecting the cybersecurity of civilian, federal networks and critical infrastructure across the United States. His access to highly sensitive information under FEMA is truly alarming. This may be an opportunity to shine a spotlight on potential weaknesses in DOGE’s processes. Given Schutt’s dual role, it is worth asking what protections exist to safeguard the critical data that state DOTs collect.
Internal Strife and Ethical Challenges
The internal challenges at DOGE don’t end with personnel shortcomings. The complex new organization has come under fire from multiple watchdogs, especially during its tumultuous initial months of operation. The special agency inspector general from the Trump administration has warned that DOGE lacks transparency and accountability. As these problems develop, a populist and technocratic outcry has demanded stricter regulation of technological companies who work in these precarious areas.
The intern’s termination and Elez’s resignation bring to light the ethical quagmires that seem to pervade DOGE. The termination of an employee for leaking confidential information squarely points to the failure of that organization’s internal controls, while Elez’s exit as a result of racist comments shows that a wider cultural issue could be at play and should perhaps be proactively tackled.
The Wall of Receipts
As the controversies mount, Musk and the DOGE team have maintained a “wall of receipts” to counteract allegations against them. This compilation of evidence is intended to show their side of the story, particularly when it comes to financial claims and operational practices. To this day, many critics remain unconvinced. They contend that while the evidence does a poor job of addressing the broader scope of data security and institutional morality.
