As federal employees launched protests of entrepreneur Elon Musk’s disruption of federal agencies last week, the Office of Personnel Management quietly released a memo shoring up the formal structure of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
An OPM memo dated Feb. 4 seeks the redesignation of chief information officers across the government from career positions to political appointees. OPM has recommended that every agency send a request to OPM to reclassify its CIO role from career reserved to “general” by Feb. 14.
The new CIO positions will be working with DOGE, a source familiar confirmed to The Daily Caller News Foundation.
The new memo gives the greatest detail about how DOGE will operate within the federal government since a Jan. 20 executive order. Yet it has been entirely overlooked by the legacy press, which has relied largely on career officials within the government who characterize DOGE’s actions as extra-governmental. Democrats like New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have sought to portray the effort as a “coup.”
However, the memo shows that DOGE is attempting to regularize its operations within the federal government.
“It is a focus of President Trump’s administration to improve the government’s digital policy to make government more responsive, transparent, efficient, and accessible to the public, and to make using and understanding government programs easier,” the memo reads.
Unlike most major institutions, the federal government has no central IT department. Instead, IT responsibilities are dispersed across federal agencies which in turn spend billions on contractors and disparate artificial intelligence technologies. Musk’s housecleaning could reshape this $163 billion industry.
DOGE is the renamed U.S. Digital Service. The U.S. Digital Service is a small office within the White House created to build the health care exchanges under the Affordable Care Act and advises on technical strategy. How the DOGE office in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building will liaison with CIOs throughout the government is not yet clear.
A Washington Post report revealed Monday that Edward Coristine, the 19-year-old DOGE team member known online as “Big Balls,” has been stationed at the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Technology. The Bureau of Diplomatic Technology provides IT services.
The memo states that the new DOGE-aligned CIOs will take on a major role in public policy on technology.
The memo gives some insight into what they will prioritize, like improving government procurement policies and privacy, and deprioritize, namely diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
“Poor technology-procurement policies can endanger property and privacy rights. Inadequate security policies can lead to vulnerabilities and hacks,” it states. “Emphasis on policies like [Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility] siphons labor and resources from other core government objectives.”
The Biden administration helped lay the groundwork for the change. Two earlier OPM memos cited in the Feb. 4 memo broadened the authority of government appointees to look outside of government for highly technical roles, including one released in the final months of the last administration.
A 2018 OPM memo under the first Trump administration noted “severe shortages of candidates and/or critical hiring needs” for STEM and cybersecurity. A September 2024 memo released under the Biden administration noted that “severe shortage of talent” in cybersecurity and other high-tech sectors persisted.
The new memo states that moving certain CIO positions away from career positions could help to alleviate it by dramatically increasing the number of candidates available to fill these important roles.
The move is in keeping with public statements about DOGE made by Musk and former DOGE co-lead and potential Ohio gubernatorial hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy about improving the federal government’s tech infrastructure, including examining the vendors the U.S. government works with and the fact that these systems don’t communicate across agencies.
Musk’s biography on his website X reads “White House Tech support.”
“My preferred title in the new administration is Volunteer IT Consultant,” Musk wrote on X on Dec. 9. “We can’t make government efficient & fix the deficit if the computers don’t work.”
“The federal government is the world’s largest IT customer… In theory, this *should* give us great buying power to negotiate good deals for taxpayers, but of course that’s not what happens,” Ramaswamy said on Dec. 5. “If the federal government were serious about reducing costs, it would procure government-wide licenses.”
Despite the intense focus on DOGE, there has been little discussion of the federal government’s existing methods for managing data and records.
The top five contractors on IT together took in $45 billion in 2024, according to Washington Technology, a trade publication that uses federal procurement data, USASpending.gov and company Security and Exchange Commission filings.
Musk’s SpaceX was the 39th largest federal contractor in government technology at approximately $1 billion. That represents about one third of Musk’s reported $3 billion in contracts with the U.S. government. Musk’s contracts in IT include the delivery of Starlink satellite internet units and services to national and state parks and the State Department, and the provision of a satellite network called Starshield to the U.S. Space Force.
In addition, all of these companies use various artificial intelligence technologies across all of their federal contracts, many of them non-open source.
Musk and DOGE were dealt a setback on Saturday when District Judge Paul Engelmayer ordered a temporary stop on DOGE’s work with U.S. Treasury data, citing cybersecurity concerns. The suit was filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James and 18 other state attorneys general.
A Washington Post story reported Friday night that Booz Allen Hamilton had described the DOGE team’s access to Treasury data — reportedly “read only” access that doesn’t allow for data manipulation — as “the single greatest insider threat risk the Bureau of Fiscal Services has ever faced.”
The company put out a statement hours after the assessment became public.
“Booz Allen did not conduct a threat assessment or make recommendations regarding DOGE,” a statement read. “Commentary provided in a draft document by a subcontractor contained unsubstantiated personal opinions. … Booz Allen has terminated the subcontractor.”
Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.
“So we’re going to have an order on that pretty soon – we can’t do that to our farmers and leisure too, hotels, we’re going to have to use a lot of common sense on that.”
President Donald Trump said Thursday that changes are coming to his aggressive immigration policies after complaints from farmers and business owners.
“Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,” Trump wrote in a social media post Thursday morning. “In many cases the Criminals allowed into our Country by the VERY Stupid Biden Open Borders Policy are applying for those jobs. This is not good. We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!”
Later Thursday, Trump made it clear that businesses need workers.
“Our farmers are being hurt badly. They have very good workers – they’re not citizens, but they’ve turned out to be great. And we’re going to have to do something about that,” the president said.
He added: “We can’t take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don’t have, maybe, what they’re supposed to have.”
Just how Trump may change his approach to immigration enforcement remains unclear, but he said he wants to help farmers and business owners.
“You go into a farm and you look and people, they’ve been there for 20 or 25 years and they work great and the owner of the farm loves them and you’re supposed to throw them out. You know what happens? They end up hiring the criminals that have come in, the murderers from prisons and everything else,” Trump said.
Trump said changes would be coming soon, but gave little detail on how policies could change.
“So we’re going to have an order on that pretty soon – we can’t do that to our farmers and leisure too, hotels, we’re going to have to use a lot of common sense on that.”
In a later post on Truth Social, Trump said illegal immigration had destroyed American institutions.
“Biden let 21 Million Unvetted, Illegal Aliens flood into the Country from some of the most dangerous and dysfunctional Nations on Earth — Many of them Rapists, Murderers, and Terrorists. This tsunami of Illegals has destroyed Americans’ Public Schools, Hospitals, Parks, Community Resources, and Living Conditions,” the president wrote. “They have stolen American Jobs, consumed BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in Free Welfare, and turned once idyllic Communities, like Springfield, Ohio, into Third World Nightmares.”
He added that deportations would continue: “I campaigned on, and received a Historic Mandate for, the largest Mass Deportation Program in American History. Polling shows overwhelming Public Support for getting the Illegals out, and that is exactly what we will do. As Commander-in-Chief, I will always protect and defend the Heroes of ICE and Border Patrol, whose work has already resulted in the Most Secure Border in American History. Anyone who assaults or attacks an ICE or Border Agent will do hard time in jail. Those who are here illegally should either self deport using the CBP Home App or, ICE will find you and remove you. Saving America is not negotiable!”
For years, Canada’s political class sold us on the idea that carbon taxes were clever policy. Not just a tool to cut emissions, but a fair one – tax the polluters, then cycle the money back to regular folks, especially those with thinner wallets.
It wasn’t a perfect system. The focus-group-tested line embraced for years by the Trudeau Liberals made no sense at all: we’re taxing you so we can put more money back in your pocketbooks. What the hell? If you care so much about my taxes being low, just cut them already. Somehow, it took years and years of this line being repeated for its internal contradiction to become evident to all.
Yet, even many strategic conservative minds could see the thinking had internal logic. You could sell it at a town hall. As an editorial team member at an influential news organization when B.C. got its carbon tax in 2008, I bought into the concept too.
And now? That whole model has been thrown overboard, by the very parties had long defended it with a straight face and an arch tone. In both Ottawa and Victoria in 2025, progressive governments facing political survival abandoned the idea of climate policy as a matter of fairness, opting instead for tactical concessions meant to blunt the momentum of their foes.
The result: lower-income Canadians who had grown accustomed to carbon tax rebates as a dependable backstop are waking up to find the support gone. And higher earners? They just got a tidy little gift from the state.
The betrayal is worse in B.C.
This new chart from economist Ken Peacock tells the story. He shared it last week at the B.C. Chamber of Commerce annual gathering in Nanaimo.
Ken-Peacock- B.C. Chamber of Commerce annual gathering in Nanaimo.
What is shows is that scrapping the carbon tax means the poor are poorer. The treasury is emptier.
What about the rich?
Yup, you guessed it: richer.
Scrubbing the B.C. consumer carbon tax leaves the lowest earning 20 percent of households $830 per year poorer, while the top one-fifth gain $959.
“Climate leader” British Columbia’s approach was supposed to be the gold standard: a revenue-neutral carbon tax, accepted by industry, supported by voters, and engineered to send the right price signal without growing the size of government.
That pact broke somewhere along the way.
Instead of returning the money, the provincial government slowly transformed the tax into a $2 billion annual cash cow. And when Mark Carney won the federal election, B.C. Premier David Eby, boxed in by his own pledge, scrapped the tax like a man dropping ballast from a sinking balloon. Gone. No replacement. No protections for those who need them most.
Filling the gas tank, on the other hand, is noticeably cheaper. Of course, if you can’t afford a car that might not be apparent.
Spare a thought for the climate activists who spent 15 years flogging this policy, only to watch it get tossed aside like a stack of briefing notes on a Friday afternoon.
Who could not conclude that the environmental left has been played. For a political movement that prides itself on idealism, it’s a brutal lesson in realpolitik: when power’s on the line, principles are negotiable.
But here’s the thing: maybe the carbon tax model deserved a rethink. Maybe it’s time for a grown-up look at what actually works
With B.C. now reviewing its CleanBC policies, here’s a basic question: what’s working, and what’s not?
A lot of emission reductions in this province didn’t come from government fiat. They were the result of business-led innovation: more efficient technology, cleaner fuels, and capital discipline.
That, plus a hefty dose of offshoring. We’ve pushed our industrial emissions onto other jurisdictions, then shipped the finished goods back without attaching any climate cost. This contradiction particularly helped to fuel the push to dump carbon pricing as a failed solution.
The progressives’ choice was made once the anti-tax arguments could no longer be refuted: to limit losses it would be necessary to deep six an unpopular strand of the overall carbon strategy. This, to save the rest. That’s why policies like the federal emissions cap haven’t also been abandoned.
To give another example, it’s also why British Columbia’s aviation sector is in a flap over the issue of sustainable aviation fuel. Despite years of aspirational policy, low emissions jet fuel blends remain more scarce than a long-haul cabin upgrade. The policy’s designers correctly anticipated that refiners would never be able to meet the imposed demand, and so as an alternative they provided a complex carbon credit trading scheme that will make the cost of flying more expensive. For those with a choice, nearby airport hubs in the United States where these policies do not apply will become an attractive alternative, while remote communities that have no choice in the matter will simply have to eat the cost. (Needless to say, if emissions reduction is your goal this policy isn’t needed anyways, since the decisions that matter in reducing global aviation emissions aren’t made in B.C. and never will be.)
I’m not showing up to bash those who have been genuinely trying to figure things out, and found themselves in a world of policy that is more complicated and unpredictable than they realized. Simply put, the chapter is closing on an era of energy policy naïveté.
The brutally honest action by Eby and Carney to eject carbon taxes for their own political survival could be read as a signal that it’s now okay to have an honest public conversation. Let’s insist on that. For years now, debate has been constrained in part by a particular form of linguistic tyranny, awash in terminology designed to cow the questioner into silence. “So you have an issue with clean policies, do you? What kind of dirty reprobate are you?” “Only a monster doesn’t want their aviation fuel to be sustainable.” Etc. Now is the moment to move on from that, and widen the field of discourse.
Ditching bad policy is also a signal that just maybe a better approach is to start by embracing a robust sense of the possibilities for energy to improve lives and empower all of the solutions needed for tomorrow’s problems. Because that’s the only way the conversation will ever get real.
Slogans, wildly aspirational goal setting and the habit of refusing to acknowledge how the world really works have been getting us nowhere. Petroleum products will continue to obey Yergin’s Law: oil always gets to market. China and India will grow their economies using reliable energy they can afford, having recently approved the construction of the most new coal power plants in a decade amid energy security concerns. Japan, which has practically worn itself out pleading for natural gas from Canada, isn’t waiting for the help of last-finishing nice guys to guarantee energy security: today, they are buying 8% of their LNG imports from the evil Putin regime.
Meanwhile, we’re in the worst of both worlds: our courageous carbon tax policy that was positioned as trailblazing not just for B.C. residents but for the world as a whole – climate leadership! – is gone, the poorest are puzzling over why things feel even more expensive, and nobody knows what comes next.
Ken-Peacock- B.C. Chamber of Commerce annual gathering in Nanaimo.
