DOGE taketh, and DOGE giveth.
But what it giveth is never as good as what it taketh. It does, however, follow a recognizable pattern under which this administration operates.
Last month, the administration announced the creation of something called “Tech Force,” which, in addition to a penchant for hyperbolic, militaristic titles, matches the Trump team’s interest in shutting down a functioning government program, and replacing it with its own business-friendly, business-adjacent, business-as-government version.
The US Tech Force, according to its government website, “is recruiting an elite corps of engineers to build the next generation of government technology.” With the White House’s backing, it will “tackle the most complex and large-scale civic and defense challenges of our era–from administering critical financial infrastructure at the Treasury Department to advancing cutting-edge programs at the Department of Defense–and everything in between.”
Participants of the two-year program will work in teams reporting to agency leadership and,” in collaboration with leading technology, receive technical training, engage with industry leaders, and work closely with senior managers from companies partnering with the Tech Force.” From there, they can seek employment with their new friends in the private sector.
Thing is, such a program to bring talented budding tech experts into government already existed–in fact, two programs, as well documented in this piece by UC Berkeley researcher Lauren M. Chambers in The Hill.
One is the United States Digital Service, which mutated into DOGE itself with a transformed mandate. The other is 18F, so named for the street intersection in Washington, DC, where its office was located. These initiatives, says Chambers, “sought to bring tech talent into the government, in order to both revitalize the aging federal workforce and modernize outdated government software.” Though they were “lightweight and widely celebrated,” they were dismantled early in Trump’s new term. In February of last year, Elon Musk posted on X that he “deleted” 18F. (Refugees of the program are trying to preserve their work at the site 18F.org.)
The difference between these programs and Tech Force says everything about the way the Trump administration approaches government service.
The previous programs sought young tech wizards who were not interested in joining the corporate tech world, but rather wanted to use their skills for the common good. This offered a way in for public-minded folks to help tackle real problems. In fact, they did: They fixed the once-problematic healthcare.gov website, and they built the structure for the IRS’s free DirectFile program, which had the audacity to challenge private tax prep giants–and which Musk thus also eliminated.
Tech Force is a welcome mat at the revolving door leading from government to business after the participants have soaked up what they can about government ins and outs. This program goes one better than most revolving doors by blurring the lines of what is government and what is private enterprise. We already know there were breaches of sensitive personal data under DOGE. What else of our private information are these partnering tech companies gaining access to in this “collaboration,” and how are they using it?
The idea that young people might be idealistic and want to serve others seems to break a circuit with the tech bro-aucracy that is occupying broad and deep sections of the federal government these days. It’s the same disconnect that makes many Trump supporters assume that protestors against the excesses of ICE’s tactics must be paid for their efforts–why else would they put their lives on the line when it’s not their own skin in the game?
When your “public servants” and their supporters don’t understand the concept of public service, when the main beneficiaries of government are billionaires, how much longer do we get to call ourselves a democracy?
Jeff Hagan
Communications Director