New administration storms into Washington, vowing to slash bureaucracy, cut costs, and reinvent government—sound familiar? While Elon Musk and Donald Trump’s radical overhaul has drawn headlines, it turns out they’re not the first to make deep cuts. Thirty years ago, Bill Clinton’s “Reinventing Government” initiative restructured federal agencies, saving billions—only, it was done with precision, bipartisan support, and a plan that didn’t throw Washington into chaos.
Under the leadership of then-Vice President Al Gore, Clinton’s government shake-up was a methodical, multi-year project aimed at making federal agencies more efficient. Unlike the Trump-Musk effort, which has been marked by mass firings, controversial executive orders, and lawsuits, Clinton’s approach worked through Congress, involved federal workers in the process, and introduced modern technology—including the early days of government-run websites.
Musk himself has attempted to link his drastic cost-cutting measures to Clinton’s era. “What @DOGE is doing is similar to Clinton/Gore Dem policies of the 1990s,” he posted on X, referring to his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative. But the reality, according to experts, couldn’t be more different.
“There was a tremendous effort put into understanding what should happen and what should change,” said Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service. “What is happening now is actually taking us backwards.”
The Trump-Musk approach has been anything but calculated. Thousands of federal workers have been abruptly dismissed, entire agencies have been gutted, and Congress has largely been bypassed. Federal judges have intervened on multiple occasions, questioning the legality of some of the administration’s moves. While Musk claims he’ll save trillions, those who orchestrated the Clinton-era government reform warn that slashing jobs without a replacement plan often leads to more spending, not less.
Elaine Kamarck, a key figure in Clinton’s “Reinventing Government” project, pointed out a crucial difference: “Unlike these people, we didn’t think there were vast trillions in efficiencies. Their mandate is only to cut. Ours was: works better, costs less.”
Clinton’s initiative focused on performance-based metrics, customer service improvements, and technology-driven efficiency. One of its biggest successes? The birth of online services such as electronic tax filing. It also encouraged workers to take ownership of reforms rather than fear them—something today’s federal employees are unlikely to feel as Musk wields a metaphorical (and sometimes literal) chainsaw at government institutions.
Ultimately, Clinton’s methodical restructuring saved approximately $146 billion and reduced the federal workforce by over 400,000 positions through voluntary buyouts and attrition—without widespread chaos. Today’s radical approach, experts warn, could have unintended and costly consequences.
“The stakes in federal government failure are really, really high,” Kamarck said. “We really worried about screwing things up. I don’t think these guys are worried enough, and it’ll be their undoing.”
