Elon Musk Reflects on DOGE Agency’s Limited Success in New Interview

In a recent interview on the “Katie Miller Podcast,” Elon Musk assessed the performance of his initiative with the Department of Government Efficiency, describing it as “somewhat successful.” He noted that he would not pursue a similar endeavor again, suggesting a preference to focus on his core businesses instead.

During the conversation, Musk, who is the CEO of both Tesla and SpaceX, discussed his departure from the controversial agency, which was formed under former President Donald Trump. He acknowledged that the challenge of rapidly transforming federal operations proved more daunting than anticipated.

Musk stated, “We were a little bit successful. We were somewhat successful.” This remark reflects a cautious evaluation of the agency’s impact, which he left before its official closure last month. When pressed by Miller about whether he would engage in a similar project again, he replied, “I don’t think so. … Instead of doing DOGE, I would have, basically, built … worked on my companies.”

His comments came amid reflections on the difficulties faced by his businesses during his involvement with the agency. Musk referenced the backlash Tesla faced, saying, “They wouldn’t have been burning the cars,” a nod to consumer protests regarding the company.

Despite the challenges associated with the DOGE initiative, Musk’s fortunes have notably improved recently. Tesla shareholders approved a compensation package that positions him to potentially become the world’s first trillionaire, underscoring his significant influence in the tech industry.

The podcast featured a wide-ranging discussion that extended beyond DOGE, touching on Musk’s perspectives on artificial intelligence, social media dynamics, conspiracy theories, and even fashion. Miller, who previously served as a spokesperson for DOGE, did not delve into the agency’s controversial methods or the systemic changes it attempted to implement.

Musk highlighted a potential achievement of the agency, claiming it could save the government as much as $200 billion annually by eliminating “zombie payments” through improved automation in federal payouts. Nevertheless, this figure is modest compared to his earlier projections that suggested potential savings in the trillions.

As the conversation unfolded, Musk’s reflections illuminated not just his ambitions but also the complexities of government reform and the challenges of balancing public sector initiatives with private enterprise. His insights offer a glimpse into the tensions between innovation and regulation in contemporary governance.

Overall, the interview encapsulates Musk’s ongoing journey as a prominent entrepreneur while illustrating the nuanced challenges of government efficiency initiatives.