Eliminate the Federal Department of Education. Let the states oversee education.
Eliminate the Federal Department of Labor. Let the states oversee labor.
Eliminate the Federal Department of Commerce. Let the states oversee commerce.
Eliminate the U.S. Post Office.
Reduce the size of the National Institute of Health by 80%.
Reduce the size of the General Services Administration by 80%.
Reduce the Department of Defense by 50%.
Overhaul Medicare and Medicaid.
One problem with that: Commerce covers a pretty large umbrella. Including the US Patent & Trademark Office (my employer).
So each state is separately responsible for issuing patents and trademarks. I’m sure that will work well.
Wasn’t aware of that. Sure, I guess you can keep them around. 
Flash forward a few years to where a high school diploma from a red state is next to worthless to employers and college admissions boards because West Virginia is teaching that the universe is 6,000 years old, Alabama says pi = 3.2, and the only textbooks used in Oklahoma are Atlas Shrugged and the Trump Bible.
Ayup.
Applications for (becoming a physician) residencies are down in the US, but they are down at TWICE the rate in states that are imposing post-Dobbs restrictions on abortion.
These doctors will NOT be able to access a family planning rotation in those states, limiting both their practice of medicine and in which states they could practice medicine.
Red states: first, let’s trash public schools; next, remove all firearm regulations; then, let’s create health care deserts.
What could possibly go wrong?
That would end OSHA too. My state handles its own safety stuff in place of OSHA (I work for the agency that does that actually) but it does so with the aid of federal money. With the DOL gone, workplace safety would absolutely plummet nationwide. (Often literally, going by what the most common workplace fatalities tend to be.)
No, it would create 50 little OSHAs.
Not necessarily. Most states don’t have their own safety agencies. You’d expect them to create them if OSHA went away, but how quickly is one question, and without the DOL whether or not they even have one would be up to each state. I could see a place like Texas saying, meh, we don’t need it.
Also, one of the deals that my agency has is that its safety standards have to meet or exceed OSHA requirements to be allowed to handle safety itself. There would be no such standards required of my state or any other state going forward.
How expensive would that be compared to a national agency?
I’m eager to see what the bookmakers say about the likely rate of workplace injuries in each of the 50 US states.
Meh, who needs protection for intellectual property? Sounds like some namby-pamby liberal egg-head stuff.
Including in the state that made it illegal to require water breaks for people working in direct sunlight?
I seem to recall that a postal service is Constitutionally required.
Maybe not so much?
The Congress shall have Power…To establish Post Offices and post Roads
They have the power to establish post offices, but it doesn’t seem to require them to do so. Neither does it specify how many they may establish. Even if you were it interpret this as a requirement, two offices and two road would meet the minimum requirements, since they used the plural. So, an office in New York, one in New Jersey, and two separate routes connecting them (for redundancy in the case of an emergency), and they’re done.
Trump needs to jump on this one.
Just think about the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
No more consumer price index, so when his tariffs spike inflation, no pesky headlines.
No more unemployment rate. Sounds like another win for when Trump crashes the economy.
They haven’t been doing a good job, have they? Replace them with something that works, for Godott’s sake!
Oh, wait…
In Nazi Germany, the various departments reporting to Hitler were often at odds with one another. They duplicated efforts, competing for resources, competed for Hitler’s favor, and sometimes had opposing goals. I know Germans have a reputation for efficiency but this was as far from it as you could get, but it made it difficult for a group to opposing Hitler to coalesce.
I suspect DOGE will help make that happen as each department curries favor with Trump as to why their budgets shouldn’t be cut. It’s going to be chaos.
Near the end of every fiscal year in the Army, we’d rush to buy a bunch of shit that we didn’t need, because our funding was use-it-or-lose-it. That was my one platoon in my one company in my one battalion in my one brigade. Multiply this by all of them, and the DOGE doesn’t have have to eliminate the Defense Department, it just has to identify and stop shit like this.
And, you know, every time there’s a government shutdown? Essentially employees still have to work, but the non-essential employees are off until the crisis is over (and then they get back pay). Why does the government have non-essential employees? DOGE should identify and eliminate things that really aren’t essential. It doesn’t have to be entire cabinet level departments.
In the private sector, competition causes us to be efficient. In particular, it’s really easy to see how Musk drives efficiency at Tesla versus what we do at the company I work for. We’re a lot less efficient than Tesla (and although I can point out Tesla’s shitty quality and manufacturing issues as as demonstrated by the benchmarking we do, in reality, it might not matter – Musk might be right).
Ditto how he runs SpaceX compared to the companies that NASA historically works with.
The larger issue is that despite everything DOGE might uncover, there’s too much pork for too many legislators that nothing is ever going to come of whatever they decide they can cut. We don’t need that new federal building in downtown Podunk, but it’s providing 300 construction jobs, so, sorry, not getting cut.
In a strange sense of “easiest”, the easiest and most benevolent of all savings would be to half the costs of Medicare and Medicaid. But note that I don’t endorse a “cut” to achieve that.
The US pays about double what it should for health care. If you can solve that, then all medical spending will half itself for the same end result.
My belief for why we have that doubled cost is that we have a positive feedback loop to offer “good” health plans to employees as a part of their payment package, which makes people choose those employers, which makes the employers want to offer an even better (i.e. more expensive) plan to rival their competition, and so on.
So, specifically what I advise is that we force people to pay for their health plans themselves (disallow it as an employment benefit) and that we start publishing Expected Years of Life Saved ratings for plans, developed by an independent analysis group (similar to how we give safety and mileage ratings to automobiles).
These two changes would cause a negative feedback loop on price that would adjust downwards to optimize for a more practical tradeoff between price and actual health value.