Democrats block Trump and Musk’s war on bureaucracy A growing resistance

So, U.S. President Donald Trump has given an incredibly flattering assessment of the work carried out by the government’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, which is doing a “great job” in exposing “tremendous fraud and corruption and waste.” To recap, the purpose of this agency was defined as reducing expenditures, restructuring federal departments, and combating bureaucracy.

Surely, all interested parties have already familiarised themselves with the preliminary findings of DOGE’s audit of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Next in line is the review of expenditures by the Pentagon and the Department of Education, where, according to Trump, Musk is “going to find billions, hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud and abuse.”

In this context, several media outlets have reported that the U.S. Treasury Secretary granted certain DOGE representatives access to the federal payment system to monitor and limit government expenditures. Meanwhile, Elon Musk stated that the Treasury Department had "instructed always to approve payments, even to known fraudulent or terrorist groups," though he did not provide specifics. As he put it, at present, more than $100 billion in benefits is being paid to individuals without a Social Security number or even a temporary identification document. Musk also claimed that the agency he leads is saving the U.S. government around $1 billion per day.

He also spoke about his agency’s discovery of financial mismanagement by the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Specifically, he cited data showing that FEMA had recently allocated $59 million to luxury hotels in New York to house illegal migrants, which he described as a violation of the law and blatant defiance of the president’s executive order. According to Musk, such funds should be used exclusively to assist Americans in the event of natural disasters.

However, resistance to such actions by Musk’s department is growing in the U.S. For instance, a district court in New York has blocked the agency’s access to Treasury Department documents containing confidential data on American citizens. This ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by 19 Democratic attorneys general against Trump, alleging that his administration violated federal law by allowing Musk’s team to access the Treasury’s central payment system.

At the same time, New Jersey Senator Andy Kim has threatened that Democrats in Congress will block a resolution to extend federal government funding. According to Kim, this could become a reality as a protest against the administration’s attempts at reorganization. He noted that while Republicans will push for a favourable outcome, they had relied on Democratic votes to pass such resolutions in the past two years—but they should not count on that now. Moreover, he stressed that the Washington administration must be held accountable for its attempts to dismantle the government. In Kim’s view, what is happening is outright lawlessness, making it impossible to support government funding when they are using it to facilitate its destruction. 

As a result of the developments described above, analysts suggest that the anti-Trump (and anti-Musk) protest will be playing out not on the streets and squares but in the courtroom. Naturally, social media will not remain silent either, with pro-Democratic content being further amplified to fuel anti-Republican sentiment. In fact, social media is already actively engaged, circulating slogans such as “Deport Elon to his historical homeland in South Africa,” “Stop the rise of fascism,” and “Protect our democracy” (implicitly referring to the Democratic Party). These same forces are continuously posting content under the hashtag #StrengthenTheResistance. However, at this stage, support for such sentiments remains far from widespread.

At the same time, not everyone within the Democratic Party agrees with this approach to the current situation. Democratic Congressman Tom Suozzi has openly pointed out that opposition to Trump has begun to position itself as the leader of a national "resistance" movement. Calling this strategy a “bad idea,” he urged against abandoning “resistance entirely” but emphasised the need to create an “inspiring vision” by maintaining balance. Only by finding compromise, Suozzi concluded, can lawmakers achieve progress in the interests of all Americans.

Thus, as it appears, the strategy to slow down Trump’s moves on the domestic front is unlikely to lose momentum; if anything, it may even strengthen. This is especially true as interested parties are trying to convey to various segments of the population the notion that the 47th president of the United States plans to assert absolute power over the federal government, regardless of law and precedent. This aspect includes firing Democratic appointees from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the National Labor Relations Board, dismissing professional lawyers from the Department of Justice who worked in the special prosecutor’s office that filed charges against Trump in connection with the January 2021 Capitol attack and the illegal possession of classified documents, etc.

In this context, many experts recall how, during his first term, Trump, representing industrial capital, faced formidable resistance from the sharks of financial capital. While Donald Trump is undoubtedly more experienced now, and it seems he currently has no issues with Congress, whether he can navigate the early challenges of his second term without significant setbacks likely depends on how flawless his actions are in sensitive, key areas. It is quite clear that the "former" officials, even if they remain silent, will hardly tolerate such strong blows, from which many may not recover for quite some time. Therefore, it is possible that this will lead to a further intensification of polarization within the American political establishment, which could, at some point, escalate into a loud confrontation.