Philip Howard

On the "efficiency commission".

---

Philip K. Howard is a lawyer, author, and civic leader. The son of a minister, Philip got his start working summers at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory for Nobel laureate Eugene Wigner. He went to Yale College and the University of Virginia Law School. He is Senior Counsel at the law firm Covington & Burling, LLP.

He has been active in public affairs his entire adult life. He is chair of Common Good, a nonpartisan organization aimed at simplifying government. His latest book, published in January, is Everyday Freedom: Designing the framework for a flourishing society. We encourage you to read it.

---

I had been planning on writing a piece about the politics of former President Trump’s embrace of Elon Musk’s offer to run a “government efficiency commission”. It’s the smartest political move Trump has made in some time, touching on an issue that exasperates vast numbers of Americans: why can’t the government get things done? How can it possibly be that the federal government has spent $7 billion to build out (so far) 7 EV charging stations? How can it possibly be that the federal government has allocated $42 billion for rural internet connectivity and (so far) has nothing to show for it?

Philip has been thinking about this issue in a much larger context. Here’s his take:

---

The Efficiency Commission, by Phil Howard:

---

Elon Musk’s offer to run a “government efficiency commission” for Donald Trump has triggered enthusiasm in some circles. It raises the question of why Democrats, who say they’re the party of good government, shouldn’t propose their own vision of an efficiency commission.

What would such an efficiency commission do? Trump conceives of it as “a complete financial and performance audit” to “fully eliminate fraud and improper payments within six months….sav[ing] trillions.” Washington is long overdue for a spring cleaning, but improper payments, totaling about $230 billion, are only a start.  

Trump’s instincts are to attack Washington, which provides him with plenty of ammo. Federal government is like the roach motel—programs check in, but they rarely check out. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) regularly reports on duplicative and ineffective programs—for example, 10 different AIDS outreach programs for minority communities, and 82 separate federal teacher training programs.

But Republicans since Reagan have beat the drum for “de-regulation,” with little effect. Almost two thirds of Americans want “major reform” of government, but they also want clean air, Medicare, and mine safety inspectors.

The historic potential for an efficiency commission is not to de-regulate but to modernize government operating structures. The core principle should be to migrate from regulatory micromanagement to simpler, results-oriented frameworks. Red tape would be replaced by human responsibility and accountability.  

Modernizing government operations would be a huge stimulus for the economy.  Removing red tape from daily activities would liberate America’s can-do spirit as well as make government more agile and responsive. Infrastructure could get built, doctors and nurses would no longer wallow in red tape, schools could take control of budgets, and government would be manageable.  

Here are five areas long overdue for overhaul, with examples of what change might look like:

--Healthcare: Thirty percent of the healthcare dollar is spent on administration. That’s over $1 trillion, or $1 million per physician. A meaningful portion of this would be avoided by (a) simplifying reimbursement—moving away from fee-for-service to a limited menu of healthcare plans (instead of thousands); (b) avoiding “prior authorization” by requiring annual true-up audits; (c) limiting regulatory dictates to practices directly affecting quality of care; patient privacy, for example, should be a general principle, not an elaborate regulatory framework; and (d) creating expert health courts to restore reliability, saving upwards of $200 billion in “defensive medicine”—unnecessary treatments done just in case there’s a lawsuit.

--Infrastructure: A six-year delay in approving large infrastructure projects more than doubles the overall cost, and prolongs environmental bottlenecks. Clear lines of authority can solve the problem—for example, give an environmental official the job of deciding when there’s been enough environmental review, and limiting court challenges to credible allegations of bad faith. Re-empowering officials to use common sense and make tradeoffs could save at least 25 percent of a projected $150 billion annual federal infrastructure spend.

--Regulation: Shifting to results-based oversight, away from most command-and-control regulations, will be more effective and less costly. While detailed rules are necessary for, say, pollution discharge limits, they are ineffective for regulating complex human activities such as workplace safety. Far better to focus on training and results than issuing fines for foot-faults and incomplete paperwork. This change would save a meaningful percentage of the $2 trillion annual regulatory burden.

--School mandates: Introducing a “rule of reason” to inflexible mandates would avoid costly litigation and unfair diversion of school budgets. Special education, for example, now consumes over 25% of total K-12 spending—or approximately $200 billion annually. Restoring a way to balance needs of all students would reduce costs and be fairer.

--Public management: Ossified federal civil service and procurement regulations guarantee waste, frustration, and ineffectiveness. The federal government spends about $300 billion annually in civil servant compensation and another $750 billion in outside contracts for weapons, IT, and outsourced services. The inefficency is notorious. The solution is a simpler management framework that empowers officials to use their judgment and empowers other officials to hold them accountable. It is hard to overestimate the potential savings of restoring manageability to government operations.

An efficiency commission could also target obsolete programs that most experts agree no longer serve any legitimate public purpose, such as the 1920 Jones Act (mandating US flag ships for domestic shipping, and costing “tens of billions of dollars”); the 1931 Davis Bacon law mandating higher wages by roughly 20% on federally-funded construction ($11 billion); farm subsidies from the New Deal to rescue starving farmers  ($20 billion); and Wall Street “carried interest” capital gains benefits ($18 billion). 

Modernizing government would be transformative to the economy. The reforms above would likely have over $1 trillion in annual impact, or over $10,000 per American family.

Instead of cutting back government, these changes would make government work better. 

Americans are looking for a candidate with ideas to make our lives better. Defining what an efficiency commission should do is a way for candidates to appeal to core voter concerns.