More than 20 federal employees left Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) on Tuesday, stating they could no longer compromise the integrity of America's public services. Their joint resignation, involving 21 staffers skilled in technology, signifies serious unrest within the U.S. DOGE Service, the tech advisory group born from the United States Digital Service (USDS).
These employees, predominantly engineers and data scientists, delivered a stark ultimatum to their superiors: they refused to "use our skills as technologists to compromise core government systems, jeopardize Americans' sensitive data, or dismantle the government’s public services." Their resignation letter, shared publicly online, was also directed at White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, articulately laying out their reasons for departure, which boiled down to ethical concerns.
According to sources familiar with the situation, the resignations stemmed from Musk’s push to overhaul the federal government, as the tech mogul took charge following President Donald Trump’s administration's unprecedented restructuring efforts. The agency aimed to reduce bureaucracy, but the staffers claimed this was coming at the expense of America's data security and efficient public service.
The letter outlined their experiences, criticising re-interviews they underwent shortly after Trump's inauguration. It stated, "Several of these interviewers refused to identify themselves, asked questions about political loyalty, attempted to pit colleagues against each other, and demonstrated limited technical ability. This process created significant security risks and was intended to intimidate government employees.”
This wave of resignations aligns with the recent trend of layoffs within DOGE, where earlier this month, many staff members were let go without clear reasons, deepening employees’ concerns over job security and the direction the agency was taking under Musk’s leadership.
Despite the turmoil, Musk downplayed the mass resignations, branding those who left as "political holdovers" on his social media platform X, claiming they refused to return to the office as directed. “They would have been fired had they not resigned,” Musk asserted.
Yet, not all Republican voices support the aggressive cuts imposed by DOGE. Senate Majority Leader John Thune expressed the need for caution, saying any workforce adjustments should be made "in a respectful way" to avoid displacing skilled workers. Rep. Nicole Malliotakis of New York also described DOGE's recent actions as "rash," advocating for controlled and thoughtful staffing decisions instead of broad, indiscriminate cuts.
Critics have raised alarms about the competency of those replacing the technology experts at DOGE, citing concerns over the lack of qualifications among the new hires brought on to execute Musk's vision for efficiency. Some Democrats and legal analysts have initiated court proceedings, arguing DOGE's actions endangered sensitive citizens’ data.
From their perspective, the resigning employees work within departments serving millions of Americans—often dealing with sensitive information. They pointed out, “Their removal endangers millions of Americans who rely on these services every day.” Notably, these agencies include those managing Social Security and disaster relief programs.
Legal actions are already underway, with attorneys general from several states seeking to halt DOGE’s initiative on grounds of privacy violations. Concerns over improper access to confidential information have arisen, especially since Musk and his associates have been granted unprecedented access to systems housing sensitive data.
Observers of the situation have equated Musk’s push for efficiency to the infamous ‘slash-and-burn’ approach, which has historically led to criticism for its lack of substantive consideration for the potential fallout. Charles Tiefer, a retired law professor, remarked on the impact of terminating numerous contracts by DOGE: "It doesn't accomplish any policy objective and only reaches pre-committed funds without true value savings.”
With the mass resignations, the credibility of DOGE is called to question as the administration continues to pursue objectives for increasing government productivity. Former USDS employees fear the loss of institutional knowledge and skilled personnel could cripple the execution of future projects.
A former USDS administrator, Mikey Dickerson, summed it succinctly: “Without USDS, the government has no access to current tech industry skills and practices.” He expressed fears about the impending drawbacks of losing proficient staff, noting how projects directly impacting public safety and welfare were now at risk.
Though the future of DOGE remains uncertain, many call for legislative oversight to safeguard workers and the services they provide. The situation emphasizes the delicate balance between operational efficiency and maintaining the quality of government services, as the mass resignation sends echoing concerns about future governance. The employees’ commitment to public service against the backdrop of rising bureaucratic pressure highlights the ethical dilemma faced by civil servants caught between the mandate of efficiency and their obligations to the American people.