OPM: DOGE Incentives Cut Federal Workforce by 300,000 in 2025

OPM estimates that DOGE’s incentive program will leave the federal government with about 300,000 fewer employees by the end of 2025. Most of these exits are voluntary resignations encouraged by DOGE, not layoffs. The shrinkage equals about one in eight federal workers, signaling a dramatic workforce contraction.

Key Points

• OPM provided the first hard estimate of DOGE’s impact on federal staffing.
• The federal workforce is projected to shrink by about 300,000 employees in 2025.
• Most departures resulted from resignation incentives offered by DOGE.
• The reduction amounts to roughly one in eight civil servants.
• The estimate came months after Elon Musk’s departure from the federal government, highlighting DOGE’s lingering effects.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment of the Hacker News discussion is overwhelmingly negative and critical of DOGE. Commenters largely view DOGE's initiatives as a destructive failure, poorly executed, and potentially self-serving, with its claimed benefits being largely fabricated or offset by greater long-term societal costs.

In Agreement

• Government waste and bloat is a significant, bipartisan issue that needs addressing, and actual reductions in spending are welcome.
• The US government faces severe fiscal unsustainability, spending much more than it collects, making cuts or efficiency measures necessary to prevent future financial crises.
• If the savings claimed by DOGE are accurate and the programs cut were truly wasteful, then those savings are a positive outcome.

Opposed

• DOGE's methods were strategically flawed and bypassed established government processes, leading to less effective and ultimately more costly outcomes than well-planned reforms like the National Performance Review.
• The premise that government size has vastly outgrown the private sector is questionable, as federal budget as a percentage of GDP and employee numbers have remained relatively stable over decades.
• The reported savings by DOGE are largely inaccurate and misleading, with independent estimates suggesting actual savings are orders of magnitude lower than claimed, and often represent cuts to placeholder contract maximums rather than real money.
• Cutting valuable programs, such as those related to health services, USAID, environmental research, and tax enforcement, for short-term savings leads to significant long-term economic and social costs, including lost tax revenue, reduced soft power, and increased future expenses.
• There are strong allegations that DOGE's true purpose was to eliminate oversight of Elon Musk's companies and remove competent personnel, rather than genuinely improve government efficiency.
• DOGE's 'savings' are likened to short-term financial relief (e.g., not paying rent or medical bills) that inevitably leads to greater long-term problems and negative societal outcomes.
• DOGE's actions are seen as a destructive force that hollowed out institutions and exacerbated existing problems without a coherent strategy for building or improving government function.