Related Posts
So the fiduciary rule got tossed yesterday
Anonymous User
Pro
Pro
Visual Storyteller
Additional Posts in Federal, Government, and Public Sector
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
At the moment it's a group of private individuals with no connection to the government. Once Trump takes over, it'll likely be a presidential commission. The most famous presidential commission is probably the Warren commission looking into the Kennedy assassination.
They can "hire" people through X because again, ATM it is literally just a group of private individuals. There's generally a lot of discretion in selecting who is on a presidential commission, though the whole " you have to pay for a co-leaders private website" is, at a minimum, going to draw litigation, though I don't think the litigation will be successful unless the trump admin actually brings them closer than allowed (ex, giving them formal titles in the white house, office space, etc, anything that brings them under the federal advisory committee act).
The most effective version of this was this was the Grace Commission under Reagan, though there was a lot of congressional criticism over it's decision to merge "operations" efficiencies with just broad stroke complaints about government "policies" (ex, you might not agree with social security as a concept but it's existence isn't an operational inefficiency, it's a policy choice to have
This report is a decent summary, especially pages 40-50
https://digitalcommons.providence.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1047&context=history_undergrad_theses
A high school honor's paper is not direct evidence of what DOGE is, will be or is attempting to be. The paper, likely written by a high school student, doesn't shed any light. on what DOGE is. DOGE is not hiring on X so that's materially false. DOGE is an internal government agency with its own agenda, does not have to report to other three-letter agencies and never publishes it's agenda exactly like the NSA. You must be a new law grad dude with statements like "at a minimum, going to draw litigation" and then follow it up "it will likely be unsuccessful". Using historical data to establish a "similar fact pattern" is exactly why lawyers who can't think like policy makers should have no place in government. You're not thinking outside the lines bro which renders your argument irrelevant and factually inaccurate. Chicago U Law School, 2010
It’s not an existing government agency. They aren’t hiring anyone because the administrations don’t turn over until inauguration. There’s already a fair amount of speculation about how it will be aligned for funding since presidents cannot create departments or agencies without legislative action in the house and senate. It would likely be an office within the white house which would make it neither an agency nor a department - which oversees agencies.
Subject Expert
It will not be a federal agency, department, or office. L1 is correct.