How DOGE birthed hundreds of whistleblowers

Summary

Post Reports: How DOGE Birthed Hundreds of Whistleblowers – Detailed Summary

Published on April 23, 2025

In this episode of Post Reports, hosted by Colby Ikowicz and featuring reporter Hannah Natenson, The Washington Post delves into the profound impact of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under the Trump administration. The discussion centers on how DOGE's aggressive restructuring efforts have led to mass layoffs within the federal government, spawning a surge of whistleblowers and raising significant security and operational concerns.

---

1. Surge of Whistleblowers Amid Mass Federal Layoffs

Reporter Hannah Natenson has been inundated with communications from federal employees reacting to DOGE's restructuring initiatives. Over the past months, particularly since late January, Hannah has received an overwhelming number of tips from across various federal departments.

• High Volume of Tips:
  Hannah Natenson ([01:03]):
  "Just on Signal alone, not counting folks who have emailed me or called me on my cell phone, I have had 785 federal workers reach out to me."

• Diverse Impact Across Agencies:
  Hannah Natenson ([00:01]):
  "Messages that I got from current federal workers across the government in the last 24 hours. They come from all different kinds of departments. The State Department, the Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Veterans Affairs, the Treasury, you name it."

These communications reveal a widespread sentiment of instability and concern among federal employees, many of whom fear imminent job losses and question the legality of DOGE's actions.

---

2. DOGE's Aggressive Restructuring Under the Trump Administration

DOGE was established with the purported goal of reducing government waste and increasing efficiency. However, its methods have sparked controversy and resistance within the federal workforce.

• Massive Job Cuts:
  Colby Ikowicz ([01:22]):
  "Since President Donald Trump unleashed DOGE on the federal government with the goal of reducing so-called waste, tens of thousands of workers have lost their jobs. Tens of thousands more are worried they are next on the chopping block."

• Undermining Democratic Norms:
  Hannah Natenson ([01:34]):
  "So many of them feel like what they're seeing is not normal. It's breaking the norms of American democracies. It's forcing them to violate the oaths they all swore to the Constitution when they took their job to the federal government."

DOGE's approach has been characterized by swift and broad reductions in workforce, often without clear criteria, leading to significant fear and uncertainty among federal employees.

---

3. Elon Musk's Role and Stepping Back from DOGE

Elon Musk, a billionaire entrepreneur, played a pivotal role in leading DOGE. However, recent developments indicate that Musk is stepping back from his leadership role to focus more on his company, Tesla.

• Announcement of Stepping Back:
  Colby Ikowicz ([17:01]):
  "He was talking to investors at Tesla and said he's going to step back and focus on Tesla."

• Impact on DOGE Operations:
  Hannah Natenson ([18:20]):
  "...DOGE is established, it is in the federal agencies. It's not going away and it's doing its thing."

Despite Musk's departure, Hannah suggests that DOGE's infrastructure and embedded presence within federal agencies will allow it to continue its operations with minimal disruption.

---

4. Security Risks and Operational Challenges

The mass layoffs orchestrated by DOGE have not only led to a brain drain but have also introduced significant security vulnerabilities within federal operations.

• Data Handling Concerns:
  Hannah Natenson ([09:26]):
  "DOGE and the Trump administration attitude with everything is to move fast, fire people fast, don't care who they are... They are diving deep into many different federal databases... without following normal security protocols... a much higher risk of getting hacked."

• Loss of Institutional Knowledge:
  Hannah Natenson ([10:37]):
  "There's an arcane coding language within Social Security known as COBOL... they have lost most of the people, top senior people who knew how to do COBOL, and young people today don't know how to do COBOL because it's very old."

The rapid reduction in workforce has left agencies like Social Security vulnerable due to the loss of experienced personnel who possess critical, often outdated, technical expertise essential for maintaining vital government systems.

---

5. The Mechanics of Mass Layoffs: Reduction in Force (RIF)

DOGE has utilized the government's Reduction in Force (RIF) process to implement widespread layoffs efficiently.

• Explanation of RIF:
  Hannah Natenson ([04:49]):
  "RIF is called a reduction in force and that's sort of the government term for layoffs. And in order to do this legally, one of the quickest ways to do it is if you eliminate an entire department."

• Two Rounds of Resignation Offers:
  Hannah Natenson ([12:44]):
  "This time they're not doing it in one centralized way... Each agency is rolling out their own offers. So this time the offers are coming from within agencies."

The first round of layoffs saw approximately 75,000 federal employees accepting severance packages. Recognizing distrust in centralized communication, DOGE has since decentralized the process, making it appear more legitimate and thereby encouraging further participation.

---

6. DOGE's Reported Successes Versus Realities

While DOGE claims significant savings and increased efficiency, The Washington Post's investigation reveals discrepancies between these claims and the actual outcomes.

• Questionable Savings Claims:
  Hannah Natenson ([21:56]):
  "DOGE put out statements on X and they have their own website tracking the savings. But we and other outlets have done repeated examinations of what they're claiming as savings, and it just doesn't add up."

• Lack of Documented Successes:
  Hannah Natenson ([22:08]):
  "I can't necessarily point you to one clear success that a lot of people have looked at and told me, like, I'm really glad they cut that."

These findings suggest that DOGE's narrative of eliminating waste may not align with the tangible benefits reported, raising questions about the true efficacy of its initiatives.

---

7. Future Implications and Continued Reporting

The Washington Post remains committed to uncovering the full scope and long-term effects of DOGE's restructuring on the federal government and the American public.

• Evolving Nature of DOGE's Work:
  Hannah Natenson ([23:14]):
  "Tracking the evolving nature of DOGE's work... initially finding waste and fraud, then cutting staff and programs, and more recently focusing on immigration and deportation efforts."

• Consequences of Cuts:
  Hannah Natenson ([23:14]):
  "Tracing the consequences and the impacts of the different services they've cut and the funding they've cut... showcasing that,... whether going to a national park or spending time outside a Social Security office with a huge long line."

The Post aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of how DOGE's actions are reshaping federal services and the broader implications for government efficiency and accountability.

---

Conclusion

This episode of Post Reports offers an in-depth examination of the Trump administration's DOGE initiative and its far-reaching effects on the federal workforce. Through Hannah Natenson's firsthand reporting and analysis, listeners gain insight into the challenges posed by rapid governmental restructuring, including significant job losses, security risks, and the erosion of institutional knowledge. The Washington Post continues to monitor and report on DOGE's ongoing impact, striving to inform the public about the true state of government efficiency and the well-being of federal employees.

---

Note: This summary is based on the transcript provided and aims to capture the essential discussions, insights, and conclusions presented in the podcast episode.

Transcript

[Hannah Natenson]

Okay, these are just a sampling of the messages that I got from current federal workers across the government in the last 24 hours. They come from all different kinds of departments. The State Department, the Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. geological Survey, the Veterans affairs, the treasury, you name it.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Hannah Natenson covers the federal workforce and the Department of Government Efficiency for the Post.

[Hannah Natenson]

There's another employee that may reach out to you. He got a really bad deal. I'm concerned with the changing mission of the irs. These decisions seem to be driven not by Congress. I just saw a Facebook post from a friend who has just dropped from an NIH melanoma study. Major changes to the bureau. It's nuked. There is another employee that may reach out to you. I've got another friend who is laid off. She's another of us Fed. So we won't have enough people to execute. I just found out one of my best work buddies is taking the resignation. Man, this is such a bummer. I think we've mostly just become dead to all of it.

[Colby Ikowicz]

In the months since Inauguration Day, Hannah's been one of the reporters who's been flooded by tips from federal employees on.

[Hannah Natenson]

Messaging apps like Signal since late January. Just on Signal alone, not counting folks who have emailed me or called me on my cell phone, I have had 785 federal workers reach out to me. And they're all reaching out to say things like what's going on at their agencies, what's going on with their personal professional lives.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Since President Donald Trump unleashed DOGE on the federal government with the goal of reducing so called waste, tens of thousands of workers have lost their jobs. Tens of thousands more are worried they are next on the chopping block.

[Hannah Natenson]

So many of them feel like what they're seeing is not normal. It's breaking the norms of American democracies. It's forcing them to violate the oaths they all swore to the Constitution when they took their job to the federal government.

[Colby Ikowicz]

On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced another massive reorganization, this time at the State Department. The plan may eliminate as many as 132 offices and 700 positions. But that same day, billionaire Elon Musk announced that he was stepping back from his role, leading DOGE to focus instead on his company, Tesla.

[Hannah Natenson]

Starting next month, I will be allocating far more of my time to Tesla. And now that the major work of establishing the Department of Government Efficiency is done.

[Colby Ikowicz]

From the newsroom of the Washington Post, this is Post Reports. I'm Colby ichowitz. It's Wednesday, April 23rd. Today we're bringing you the latest on the Trump administration's efforts to reshape the federal government and the future of Doge Beyond. Elon Musk. Hannah, thank you so much for joining us. I'm such a big fan of your work. Do we have a sense of just how many people have left or been fired from their federal jobs since Trump took over?

[Hannah Natenson]

So it's really hard to say, partly because it's not easy to extract data from the federal government right now. Some agencies have been publicizing their numbers of people leaving, like Veterans affairs did early on, kind of boasting about it. Some agencies are not saying anything. Sometimes we get leaks, some internal numbers. It's also hard to say because this is still happening right now. Some agencies have begun offering sort of a second round of resignation offers even as they prepare larger scale mass firings. It's safe to say at this point it's somewhere in the hundreds of thousands.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Wow.

[Hannah Natenson]

But I couldn't give you an exact number, and I'm not even sure if anyone in the Trump administration could give you an exact number.

[Colby Ikowicz]

The cuts have come so fast. Can you just remind us what some of the major cuts have been that have just been announced in the last several weeks?

[Hannah Natenson]

So one of the biggest cuts that happened recently was the Education Department first, where it was almost 50% of the department. More recently, you've seen massive cuts within Health and Human Services. Yesterday at the State Department, announcements went out about a massive, large planned cuts.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Have you been able to ascertain, like, how they're making these choices around what to cut, where to cut, like why they're focusing on the agencies they're focusing.

[Hannah Natenson]

On, as much as I can tell, there's not necessarily a ton of rhyme or reason to it. They have a drive to get down significantly in terms of staffing. And due to the arcane rules that govern government processes. One of the fastest ways to do that, apart from getting people to voluntarily resign, is to do these blanket RIFs, for lack of a better term. So RIF is called a reduction in force and that's sort of the government term for layoffs. And in order to do this legally, one of the quickest ways to do it is if you eliminate an entire department. So that's what's happening right now.

[Colby Ikowicz]

I mean, I've been watching your reporting with such awe because as a reporter, to get a tip from someone on the inside of an institution is rare in and of itself. And you've been getting hundreds. I mean, what has it been like for you to be on the receiving end of all of these federal workers desires to let the public know about what's going on.

[Hannah Natenson]

It's been pretty exhausting. There tend to be big waves of people reaching out. When something happens or when I have a story that for whatever reason resonates with a lot of people, then I'll get. At times it's been as many as like a new person every three minutes. And the thing about it is, just given what these people are going through and given the newsiness of this moment, I always feel like I have to respond to every person. And I do eventually respond to every person. Unfortunately, I'm also somewhat OCD and inbox zero. So there were a couple weeks and weekends where I would fall asleep at about 11pm trying to respond to people on signal and then wake up at 6am and keep responding to people on signal. And my fiance was not happy with me for a little bit there. But at this point I have a system to process the tips. And I've got a much better handle on it now. But for a bit there, it was kind of crazy.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Yeah. How do you even choose, like what tips to follow versus, you know, which are just. You may be just someone who needs to vent.

[Hannah Natenson]

Well, I mean, it's usually apparent from the message if they're just in a really awful position personally or if it's news people who just want to vent. I always try to make time for that. And sometimes it's just as much as like, they don't even need to get on the phone. They just want to hear back from someone saying, I hear you, I'm sorry this happened. And that's what I say. And then sometimes some of them end up in stories and. And sometimes they just want to keep chatting. And so I've just done that for them.

[Colby Ikowicz]

That's a lot to take on.

[Hannah Natenson]

It's been somewhat intense at times, but it feels like a public service, if that makes sense.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Yeah. How do you think you became kind of the federal government worker whisperer?

[Hannah Natenson]

Well, I can tell you exactly before all this started, I covered education and I had a tip. I think it was related to the Education Department. And I noticed this Reddit sub forum called rfednews where there are at this point, I think, half a million federal workers in there. There weren't quite as many when this all started, but I just. Very early, I think it was January 23rd, 25th, not too long after the administration started, I just posted this sort of vague question relating to this one tip and I listed my. And a colleague's names, emails and Signals. And it took off. And I got a bunch of outreach from that, from feds. And then I sort of realized how valuable of a sourcing element this was. And once these people had taken the risk to speak to me, I felt like I wanted to tell them that I'd apart from the individual sources. Like, I wanted the people in this Reddit sub forum to know that I was not just mining them. I was actually writing news that was relevant to their lives because people were brave enough to talk to me. So I started this practice of posting my stories in there with gift links and my contact information again. And that has just built and built and built. And so I've had several posts go, like, very viral. And at this point, a lot of people just know who I am from Reddit.

[Colby Ikowicz]

That's incredible. I was thinking, because all of these people are reaching out to you on Signal, and obviously Signal was in the news recently. For a journalist getting added to a Signal chat and being privy to war plans. Has the fact that all these federal government officials, employees, are reaching out to a reporter on Signal, has that created any kind of security risk for the federal government?

[Hannah Natenson]

I mean, I would say the security risk that I hear from federal workers and I hear from experts is not so much the idea that people are reaching out on Signal, which is sort of a secure, encrypted messaging app. The number of people who are being let go are fired, especially really young, talented people who worked maybe in more sensitive areas. That's more what's been flagged to me as a security concern, because those are the exact kind of people that foreign countries would want to target. That's always been true. If they want to get information about the inner workings of the federal government. Disaffected ex federal workers are a great target. And you got a lot of them right now.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Oh, that's so interesting.

[Hannah Natenson]

Also, the way that DOGE is handling what they're doing. So often it comes to how they're handling federal data, which they're diving deep into many different federal databases. And I have a story coming about this, but in many cases, trying to merge them or pass the data through different places quite swiftly and without following normal security protocols, that, to experts, is also creating a big security risk because anytime data is in transit, it becomes more accessible. And if you don't follow the sort of staid, typical procedures that have guided the federal government until now, you have a much higher risk of getting hacked. But the DOGE and the Trump administration attitude with everything is to Move fast, fire people fast, don't care who they are, get rid of whole offices fast. It doesn't matter if you're getting rid of an office that was integral to our safety as a country. So I'd say that's the bigger concern I've heard signal. I'd say that's not the biggest security risk that has been flagged to me.

[Colby Ikowicz]

I've also been thinking about the fact that there's so many people that have worked in the federal government. You talked about young people. There's also institutions, knowledge. Right. People that have worked in the federal government for decades, and we're losing that subject matter. Experts in all of these agencies have there been some notable examples of this? Are people worried that suddenly people aren't going to know how to run some of these really important programs?

[Hannah Natenson]

Well, I will tell you, walking into this room to record this episode, I got a message from someone at the State Department saying this is a generational loss for the State Department, talking about not even just the proposed cuts, but you've got a huge number of people who are taking the resignation. Not that many took the first round of the resignation offer put out by the Trump administration. But this second one I'm hearing from across agencies, massive numbers of people are taking it because they are tired of being treated like this. And in many cases, they don't think what the Trump administration is doing is legal or complies with the Constitution. And so some are choosing to stay and try to do good from inside the way they see it. But. But a lot of people are leaving. And so I've been hearing from all different agencies, we won't have anyone who knows how to do it anymore. We won't have anyone who knows how to use. For example, there's an arcane coding language within Social Security known as cobol, and it's what's used to structure all of their backend databases that contain highly sensitive personal information for the millions of Americans who have or have ever received benefits from Social Security. COBOL is the backbone of that system. And they have lost most of the people, top senior people who knew how to do cobol, and young people today don't know how to do COBOL because it's very old. So that's just one example. But I hear stuff like this every day at the nih, within Health Services, within State Department. People are very worried about what this will mean in terms of a brain drain and experience drain. And they're starting to get worried that if there's ever a time period where we are going to try to rebuild our federal government in some way. They're worried that no one's going to sign up for that.

[Colby Ikowicz]

It feels like in an effort to make things more efficient, they might in fact be making some things more inefficient.

[Hannah Natenson]

I also hear that about 1200 times a day.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Not an original idea. You referenced the deferred resignation program that offered people the option to resign with some severance pay. And I guess roughly 75,000 people took that deal.

[Hannah Natenson]

Per the administration.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Per the administration, 75,000 people took that deal. And you mentioned there's now a second round of offers that is being expected soon.

[Hannah Natenson]

So it's this time I think they learned their lesson a little bit. The first one came from this office that I knew nothing about until late January, but now know a lot about, called opm, the Office of Personnel Management. And it acts as the HR arm for the government, typically. And so the DOGE team set up this all government emailing system, which didn't exist, by the way, until now. And you might think it sounds simple, oh, why shouldn't you be able to email all of the millions of federal employees? There are actually security risks to having so many people's responses or emails going into one collector, which is a whole nother issue. But anyways, the first deferred resignation offer came from one central email address at opm. It was very new under the Trump administration and people didn't even trust it. They didn't understand why a random OPM email address was telling them, like, resign. And so a lot of people actually reported it as phishing. But this time they're not doing it in one centralized way. Each agency is rolling out their own offers. So this time the offers are coming from within agencies. People see it as more reliable. And so we've already seen, seen some second round offers go out at Social Security, Education as well. And you're going to see more and more in coming weeks.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Is there any expectation of how many federal employees might take it this time around?

[Hannah Natenson]

I mean, again, some of these are still open, some have closed. I think a lot are still open and some haven't even been announced yet. So I couldn't tell you. Tens of thousands is definitely safe. You could possibly be into the hundreds. I just don't think we know yet.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Does DOGE have a, like a goal? Is there a goal for how many people they want to cut out of the federal government?

[Hannah Natenson]

So I really wish I could answer that question fully and comprehensively. And if we find the answer, trust me, The Washington Post will report it. I will say my colleagues Emily Davies and Jeff Stein had a story a little bit ago about internal White House document they obtained that showed that federal officials are preparing for agencies to cut between 8 and 50% of their employees. The document covered 22 agencies and didn't have information in some categories. And also those familiar with the document told my colleagues that the planning remains fluid. But that's the closest I can give you so far. But we're, believe me, we're all looking for the answer.

[Colby Ikowicz]

After the break, what Doge may look like once Elon Musk takes a step back from his government work.

[Hannah Natenson]

We'll be right back.

[Carol Lennig]

I'm Carol Lennig. I'm an investigative reporter at the Washington Post. My basic assignment is to help readers understand complex government policies and government officials claims and figure out if they're getting the true story. We work to expose what's hidden and what powerful people want to keep hidden. We dig deep to reveal what's true and readers don't have time to do that. Only we can bring to you the reality of how a Medicare program is repeatedly failing. Only we can dig in and figure out that somebody who nominated for a really important job made up a big part of his resume. Subscriptions support this work. I'm Carol Leonig and I'm one of the people behind the Post.

[Colby Ikowicz]

So there was some big news yesterday. Elon Musk announced that he's going to step back from leading Doge. It's something we've been expecting him to do for a little while now. But what did he say specifically about why he's stepping back?

[Hannah Natenson]

I don't know that he said specifically all too much, but he did make this sort of announcement as Tesla reported a stunning 71% plunge in profits this quarter compared with the first quarter of last year. And so, as some of my colleagues have reported, he was talking to investors at Tesla and said he's going to step back and focus on Tesla. I can tell you that my reporting with colleagues has indicated that for a little bit now he's wanted to step back anyway because he feels like he's under attack from what he views as the radical left, which has gone on an unwarranted jihad against him. He's tired of taking all the flak and so he wants to step back. He also feels like he doesn't really need to be directly there as much because Doge is established, it is in the federal agencies. It's not going away and it's doing its thing. Maybe he doesn't need to be as hands on, I can tell you. In the early days of Doge, sometimes when Doge folks were trying to get access to agencies, they'd even get Elon Musk on the phone. So someone would be resisting and they'd be like, well, give me a second. And they'd call him and he'd speak to the low level federal employee he was resisting, and they'd usually give in because it's Elon Musk. They don't need that anymore. They're already inside all of the data.

[Colby Ikowicz]

So will his absence impact Doge's operations at all, you think?

[Hannah Natenson]

I wish I knew the for sure answer to that, but my best guess from the reporting I've done is probably not. I mean, I feel like he can be gone back to Tesla and still communicating with the Doge people, for one thing. And also, they are, like he says, they're embedded across the government.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Right.

[Hannah Natenson]

I don't think at this point he was involved in everything they were doing anyways, because honestly, they're doing way too much. They're in every agency. Each of the Doge team members have like eight jobs across the government. I've been talking about how I have been feeling like I'm working a lot. All the. I can't even imagine, frankly. Like, I think they're just not sleeping. They're sleeping in the federal buildings. We've reported and others have reported, they are working all the time. I can't imagine Elon was in every single one of those chats anyways.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Right. How many Doge people are there?

[Hannah Natenson]

It's in the dozens, as far as we can tell.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Okay, and if Musk steps back, is there going to be someone like a figurehead that's going to lead Doge, or is he still kind of the de facto leader of it?

[Hannah Natenson]

There have been people who are like, more prominent, like Steve Davis or Thomas Shedd, which are sort of his key subordinates. It also seems like within as much as we can understand the structure of Doge within different agencies, different Doge people take the lead at different agencies. It doesn't necessarily seem like they're all reporting centrally back to one person who's overseeing all the work, because, like I said, there's just too much work. You know, I'd say different folks have risen to the top of different agencies. I'm assuming that will continue.

[Colby Ikowicz]

I feel like when Doge first started, when the Trump administration first started, it was like a daily deluge of news stories about Doge and what Doge is doing. And now that DOGE has kind of been working behind the scenes, have we already gotten desensitized to the fact that there are a bunch of people led by someone who wasn't elected or appointed, going through and just slashing the federal government?

[Hannah Natenson]

I think to some extent, yes. And so that's one thing that I've noticed. You know, we keep breaking different stories about Dojas inside this database. Dojas inside that database. And at this point, for something to really resonate, it seems, with readers, it's actually better to, if there's news, we have to report it. Right. But the stories that I think, you know, have seen the most powerful impact lately are those where we're able to step back and show people the broader picture. So we had a story just really saying to people, these are all the ways that DOGE is collecting data on undocumented folks. Yeah. Housing data, Social Security data, you name it, to try to force them out of the country or to help with deportation efforts. And that really resonated with readers. So I think as much as we can, we as a newsroom are trying to make sure we don't get too lost in just the Daily. DOGE is in this data, DOGE is in that data. But show readers, like, as much as we can, determine the bigger picture of what they're doing. And look, if that includes successes, we will definitely report that. I mean, doge's mission is no federal worker disagreed with at the beginning. Everyone you talk to will acknowledge, like, there's waste in the government. We'd love to work with you to make things more efficient, more streamlined, even staff cuts, but not the way they've been doing it, which is just slashing willy nilly. A lot of people have called it policy by keyword, because in some cases where DOGE is cutting grants or firing staff, you can clearly see, like the way they did it. Command, find dei. Right. And so they're cutting things without understanding what they're cutting. And the last time the government went through a major reduction, which was Clinton, and it was done much differently, much slower, much more thoughtfully. And people just feel like none of that is happening this time around.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Have there been successes documented? I mean, has DOGE identified waste and fraud within some of the databases they're accessing or the agencies that they've been mining?

[Hannah Natenson]

I mean, not really, unfortunately. They put out statements on X and they have their own website tracking the savings. But we and other outlets have done repeated examinations of what they're claiming as savings, and it just doesn't Add up, I will say people are open to the idea of more technologically efficient solutions for things as well. But instead of working with the tech teams and departments, DOGE keeps firing all of the people who are working on tech products. So I can't necessarily point you to one clear success that a lot of people have looked at and told me, like, I'm really glad they cut that. And I'm sure DOGE would dispute what I'm saying. And my answer to that is, please come talk to me and show me more of where you're actually succeeding, because I'm not hearing it right now.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Yeah, I was gonna say, have you had any contact with anyone that works for Doge? Like, are DOGE people talking to the media?

[Hannah Natenson]

I have tried to reach them several times. Obviously, whenever we name someone in a story, we try to call them. I have not gotten any comments.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Okay. So, Hannah, as you continue covering this story, what are you gonna be looking for in terms of what's happening within our federal government?

[Hannah Natenson]

Certainly the continued changes, certainly doing stories that try to show what all these little different ways that doges inside federal agencies mean, stories that try to trace out now what they're doing, because the focus has shifted since the start. Where they came in, it was all finding waste and fraud, and then it was cutting staff and cutting programs that they were either deemed wasteful or against the administration's political agenda, which in some cases they used the same rationale to, more recently, a huge focus on immigration, aiding the administration in its efforts to deport undocumented immigrants, to merging lots of databases. So we're trying to track sort of the evolving nature of Doge's work. But something that we're also really focused on, me and other colleagues is also starting to go out and trace the consequences and the impacts of the different services they've cut and the funding they've cut because, you know, get out of D.C. there is massive consequences in D.C. but there are massive consequences across the country. I've already had colleagues go out to different parts of the country to showcase that, whether going to a national park or spending time outside a Social Security office with a huge long line. But I know me and other reporters are determined to keep going out and doing those stories, too.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Hannah, thank you so much for taking the time.

[Hannah Natenson]

Yeah, thank you for having me.

[Colby Ikowicz]

Hannah Natenson covers the federal workforce for the Post. That's it for Post Reports. Thanks for listening. Today's show was produced and mixed by Ted Muldoon. It was edited by Peter Bresnan. Thanks to Mike Madden. I'm Colby Ikowicz. We'll be back tomorrow with more stories from the Washington Post.