The article discusses Florida Governor DeSantis's strategy of emulating Elon Musk in targeting waste and fraud through his DOGE initiative. While highlighting the rhetorical advantage of addressing these issues, the author notes that defining fraud can become contentious based on legal interpretations, as exemplified by J.D. Vance's views on immigration policy. The piece also emphasizes the challenge in defining waste—a concept that lacks clear parameters. Ultimately, the author's approach calls for relying on experts for evaluating potential government cuts rather than making unilateral claims of fraud or waste.
There is an obvious rhetorical advantage to claiming that DOGE is targeting fraud and waste. After all, everyone agrees that fraud and waste are bad.
While it might seem that fraud would be easy to determine, what counts as fraud will always be a matter of which interpretation of the law is being used.
The concept of waste is much more problematic.
As I am not an expert on government finances I will, unlike Musk, leave the merit of any cuts to the experts.
Collection
[
|
...
]