You can do your own research and see what you find. Here’s what I found.
A Google search confirmed my assumption that federal civilian employees cost less, a lot less, than federal contractors.
“Specifically, the federal government approves service contract billing rates—deemed fair and reasonable—that pay contractors 1.83 times more than the government pays federal employees in total compensation (including benefits), and more than 2 times the total compensation paid in the private sector …”. [Source: https://www.pogo.org/public-comments/feds-vs-contractors-federal-employees-often-save-money-but-an-advisory-panel-is-needed-to-create-a-cost-comparison-model#:~:text=Specifically%2C%20the%20federal%20government%20approves,the%20private%20sector%20for%20comparable]
The implications for DOGE:
-
- Be careful that reductions in the federal civilian employees aren’t replaced with federal contractors. If this happens, it will reverse DOGE savings in a big hurry.
-
- Replace existing federal contractors with federal civilian employees.
FYI, there are about 2.4 Million federal civilian employees and, God only knows, something like 3.7 Million federal contractors.
I’m thinking out loud. Just to explore the size of the opportunity, suppose we waved out magic wand and converted 1 Million federal contractors to 1 Million federal civilian employees. In the same jobs doing the same work. (There should be no loss in the quantity or quality of whatever in the hell they are doing. Same people doing same stuff.) Note that 1 Million is “only” 27% of the contractors. 1 out of 4.
Suppose contractors cost on average $100,000 more than govies’ salaries and benefits, which is about right.
That saves 1 Million x $0.1 Million = $0.1 Trillion or $100 Billion.
Aside from hurting companies that provide all those contractors, their revenues and profits and the bonuses of their executives, I don’t see a downside. (I think the individual person who is a contractor likely gets about the same pay and benefits. In other words, they still have a job and don’t get hurt.)
My truth is that NOT doing this is waste, fraud, and abuse.
PS This is intended to be a constructive idea that “painlessly” reduces government spending. It could gain the support of federal civilian employee labor unions which might gain more members … and maybe the support of the far left which just doesn’t big corporations.
Discover more from Reed Harrison's
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Reed, do you start with the assumption that all employees and contractors are needed?
What say you about unnecessary, redundant and incompetent people in both categories. Would not elimination of these jobs be the logical first step?
Regarding the overall task of DOGE, I’ve thought of the analogy of the home flipper. These folks buy home with the goal of improving them for gain. Step1 is typically the initial inspection prior to making an offer. Much like the initial review of government expenditures and efficiency by DOGE. Unlike DOGE, the flipper can walk away from a property with far too many drawbacks. DOGE must accept what they find and devise a plan to deal with it!
Step2 is making an offer and buying the property. The Federal Government has already “bought into” whatever agency DOGE is examining.
Now the fun starts for the flipper: DEMOLTION!! This is the phase in which the unexpected is revealed. Cracked foundations, unsafe electrical elements, clogged plumbing , termite damage, water damage, etc. Like the flipper, DOGE is uncovering some very unanticipated problems. One may say the flipper could of been more tedious with the initial inspection. But DOGE has to deal with what they are handed. Waste, fraud and abuse are the “unexpected “ matters for DOGE.
The builder must manage what they bought into and this may blow the budget, turning a bargain into a nightmare. DOGE is tasked to fix the nightmares they uncover.
The ultimate buyer of the flippers final product is a willing customer. They will pay what the market will bare.
The American taxpayer is the unwitting customer of the DOGE remodel. They have to fund the
“ remodeled “ government agency with their tax dollars . Don’t the taxpayers deserve the final product they would gladly finance?
Hi Mike, 1.) No, I don’t think all federal civilian employees and contractors are needed. I think $500B of low/no value programs should be cut with DOGE identifying opportunities and Congress deciding. (That’s Congress’s job and they were elected to represent us in deciding on what a remodeled government looks like. But decide they must.) I think efficiency improvements should result in $500B of savings, with same quantity and quality of output at a lower cost. DOGE should identify opportunities and the leadership of departments/agencies should decide which to implement. I need to emphasize that if it is truly efficiency improvement, we don’t lose any quantity and quality of what we get. But, we need to hold Congress accountable for delivering $500B of cuts and department/agency leadership accountable for delivering $500B of efficiency improvements. 2.) My concern is that our tax dollars, in part, pay for labor (people, workers) and we pay too much for a lot of that labor: contractors. It will be too easy to reduce the federal civilian workforce and then replace some of them with higher cost contractors. The number of federal civilian employees gets a lot of attention (under the guise of a “smaller government”); the number of federal contractors far too little. 3.) There are a lot of opportunities to reduce costs aside from labor, for example unused and unneeded office space, overpaying for stuff, etc.