SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
heritage foundation
DOGE Is Hitting the Accelerator on the Creeping Privatization of the US Government
Trump’s latest moves can be viewed as a massive speedup of a decades-long trend, rather than a break from the past.
Mar 22, 2025
Since returning to office, President Donald Trump has aggressively moved to shrink the federal government. His administration has frozen federal grants, issued executive orders aligned with the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, and, most prominently, created what he calls the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE.
DOGE has been billed as a cost-cutting initiative, although the actual amount of money being saved remains unclear. To lead DOGE, Trump appointed Elon Musk, a megadonor whose companies hold federal contracts worth billions. Musk has already moved forward with major cuts, including sweeping workforce reductions, the curtailment of government operations, and purges of entire agencies. Thousands of federal workers have lost their jobs.
While certainly dramatic, these actions reflect a longer trend of privatizing government. Indeed, my sociological research shows that the government has steadily withdrawn from economic production for decades, outsourcing many responsibilities to the private sector.
3 indicators of privatization
At first glance, total government spending appears stable over time. In 2024, federal, state, and local expenditures made up 35% of the U.S. economy, the same as in 1982. However, my analysis of Bureau of Economic Analysis data offers a new perspective, recasting privatization as a macroeconomic phenomenon. I find that U.S. economic activity has become increasingly more privatized over the past 50 years. This shift happened in three key ways.
First, government involvement in economic production has declined. Historically, public institutions have played a major role in sectors such as electric power, water delivery, waste management, space equipment, naval shipbuilding, construction, and infrastructure investments. In 1970, government spending on production accounted for 23% of the economy. By 2024, that figure had fallen to 17%, leaving the private sector to fill the gaps. This means a growing share of overall government spending has been used to fund the private sector economy.
The privatization trend risks eroding democratic accountability and worsening racial and gender inequalities.
Second, government’s overall ability to produce goods and services—what economists call “productive capacity”—has fallen relative to the private sector, both in terms of labor and capital. Since 1970, public employment has lagged behind private sector job growth, and government-owned capital assets have trailed those of the private sector. Although public sector capital investments briefly rebounded in the 2000s, employment did not, signaling a shift toward outsourcing rather than direct hiring. This has significant implications for wages, working conditions, and unionization.
Third, and relatedly, government increasingly contracts work to private companies, opting to buy goods and services instead of making them. In 1977, private contractors accounted for one-third of government production costs. By 2023, that had risen to over half. Government contracting—now 7% of the total economy—reached $1.98 trillion in 2023. Key beneficiaries in 2023 included professional services at $317 billion, petroleum and coal industries at $194 billion, and construction at $130 billion. Other examples include private charter schools, private prisons, hospitals, and defense contractors.
The Meaning of Privatization
Privatization can be understood as two interconnected processes: the retreat of government from economic production, and the rise of contracting. The government remains a major economic actor in the U.S., although now as more of a procurer of goods and services than a provider or employer.
The government’s shift away from production largely stems from mainstreamed austerity politics—a “starve the beast” approach to government—and backlash against the New Deal’s expansion of federal economic involvement. In 1971, the controversial “Powell Memo,” written by future Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell, mobilized business leaders around the goal of expanding private sector power over public policy. This fueled the rise of conservative think tanks, including the Heritage Foundation, the eventual architect of the Project 2025 privatization agenda.
While government production shrank, government contracting expanded on promises of cost savings and efficiency. These contracting decisions are usually made by local administrators managing budgets under fiscal stress and interest group pressure, including from businesses and public sector unions.
Yet research shows that contracting frequently fails to reduce costs, while risking monopolies, weakening accountability and public input, and sometimes locking governments into rigid contracts. In many cases, ineffective outsourcing forces a return to public employment.
The Consequences of Privatization
Trump’s latest moves can be viewed as a massive acceleration of a decades-long trend, rather than a break from the past. The 50-year shift away from robust public sector employment has already privatized a lot of U.S. employment. Trump and Musk’s plan to cut the federal workforce follows the same blueprint.
This could have major consequences.
First, drastic job cuts likely mean more privatization and fewer government workers. Trump’s federal workforce cuts echo President Ronald Reagan’s 1981 mass firing of more than 11,000 air traffic controllers, a source of prolonged financial struggles and family instability for many fired workers. Trump’s firings and layoffs are already reaching far beyond Reagan’s.
As Trump’s administration aggressively restructures federal agencies, these changes will likely proceed without public input, further entrenching private sector dominance.
In addition, since federal spending directly contributes to gross domestic product, cuts of this magnitude risk slowing the economy. The Trump administration has even floated the idea of changing GDP calculations, potentially masking any reality of economic decline.
Rapid privatization is also likely to trigger significant economic disruptions, especially in industries that depend on federal support. For example, USAID cuts have already sent shock waves through the private sector agricultural economy.
Finally, the privatization trend risks eroding democratic accountability and worsening racial and gender inequalities. That’s because, as my prior research finds, public sector unions uniquely shape American society by equalizing wages while increasing transparency and civic participation. Given that the public sector is highly unionized and disproportionately provides employment opportunities for women and Black workers, privatization risks undoing these gains.
As Trump’s administration aggressively restructures federal agencies, these changes will likely proceed without public input, further entrenching private sector dominance. This stands to undermine government functioning and democratic accountability. While often framed as inevitable, the American public should know that privatization remains a policy choice—one that can be reversed.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'They Will Have to Come Through Us': Sunrise Protests Trump Attacks With Education Department Study-In
"Trump and Musk want to defund public schools so they can give their fellow billionaires a bigger tax break," warned one organizer. "We won't let them rob us of a good education."
Mar 21, 2025
Students and allies rallied outside the Washington, D.C. headquarters of the U.S. Department of Education on Friday for a "study-in" protest against President Donald Trump's plan to shut down the federal agency—a longtime policy goal of right-wing groups including the organization behind the infamous Project 2025—and other administration attacks on their future.
Protesters set up school desks with signs reading "Trump, Stop Stealing From Kids" and "Kids Deserve Good Schools" on a sidewalk outside the agency's main office. Sunrise Movement, the youth-led climate campaign that led the demonstration, vowed to "defend our schools, our futures, and our democracy" from attacks by Trump and Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency.
"If Trump and Musk want to destroy the futures of millions of students across the country, they will have to come through us," Sunrise Movement said on Instagram ahead of the protest.
On Thursday, Trump signed an executive order directing billionaire businesswoman-turned-Education Secretary Linda McMahon to "take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return education authority to the states." Trump's order followed the Department of Education's announcement earlier this month that it would fire half of its workforce.
The executive order delighted conservatives, who have long targeted the agency tasked with protecting civil rights and equal access in schools, administering federal student aid programs, funding billions of dollars in scholastic loans and grants, and more. The Heritage Foundation, which led Project 2025—often described as a blueprint for a far-right takeover of the federal government—applauded the directive.
However, according to Sunrise Movement:
Abolishing the Department of Education would have severe impacts on students, teachers, and parents. Schools will face larger class sizes, fewer teachers, and severe underfunding, making it even harder for students to get the education they deserve. Pell Grants would be eliminated, putting higher education out of reach for millions. Programs that support students with disabilities, English learners, and low-income families—as well as funding for school safety, mental health services, and building repairs—will be slashed.
"Trump and Musk want to defund public schools so they can give their fellow billionaires a bigger tax break," 19-year-old Sunrise Movement schools organizing manager Adah Crandall of Washington, D.C. said Friday.
"We won't let them rob us of a good education," Crandall vowed, adding that she won't let "Musk and his goons" destroy her generation's future.
Wanya Allen, a student at Seminole State College of Florida and Sunrise Movement's Philadelphia community lead, said: "The Department of Education is a human right. We are responsible as the youth to take the torch from our ancestors to continue the fight."
"The Pell Grant that allowed me to attend college is only made possible by the Department of Education," Allen added. "Trump and his billionaire Cabinet are stealing from everyday people like me and our opportunities to access education."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Influenced by the Architects of Project 2025, Utah Poised to Phase Out Automatic By-Mail Voting
"We already have a good voting system and it's not broken, so it doesn't need to be fixed," said the Utah advocacy director for Mormon Women for Ethical Government.
Mar 17, 2025
Utah has the unusual distinction of being a deep-red state where voters enjoy automatic by-mail voting, but that will likely change in the next few years, in part thanks to the influence of conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation.
The state is poised to codify legislation that would get rid of the practice of automatically mailing ballots to all active, registered voters. The GOP-controlled legislature recently passed a bill that will phase out the state's current automatic by-mail voting system by 2029 and also requires voters to list the last four digits of their state identification number with their return envelope beginning in 2026, according to the Utah News Dispatch. Those who opt in to voting by mail and include their state ID information will still be able to vote by mail.
The bill is a scaled back version of an earlier proposal that would have "drastically restricted voting by mail and required most Utahns to return their ballots in person at either a polling place or a drop box manned by at least two poll workers while showing their government-issued ID," per the Utah News Dispatch.
Utah Republican Gov. Spencer Cox is expected to sign the legislation, The Washington Postreported Monday.
"We already have a good voting system and it's not broken, so it doesn't need to be fixed," Melarie Wheat, the Utah advocacy director for Mormon Women for Ethical Government, told the Post. "There are going to be people who are expecting their vote-by-mail ballot and are not going to get it, who are going to say, 'Well, it's just not worth it and I don't have time to go in at this point and vote in person.'"
Chris Diaz, director of legislative tracking for the Voting Rights Lab, told the outlet that "there's never been a state that did this, in taking that step backwards after adopting universal mail voting."
In 2012, Utah began allowing counties to run elections entirely by mail if they chose to do so, according to the outlet Bolts. Eventually, by 2018, about 90% of Utah voters cast ballots by mail, and in 2020 the state changed the default voting method for registered voters to vote by mail by automatically mailing a ballot to them (while still providing in-person voting options).
Researchers at Brigham Young University found that the shift to vote by mail led to a dramatic increase in voter participation in municipal elections.
Trump has repeatedly claimed that mail-in voting leads to fraud—despite having used the system himself in Florida. Research has found that incidences of fraud with mail-in ballots are exceedingly rare—and a recent legislative audit of Utah's election system failed to find "significant fraud."
State Rep. Jefferson Burton (R-64), the lawmaker who championed the bill, conceded to Bolts that the audit had not found widespread fraud in the state and that vote-by-mail has had a positive impact on turnout.
According to the outlet, when speaking about the bill Burton cited a scorecard maintained by the Heritage Foundation, the right-wing think tank that published the far-right policy blueprint Project 2025. The Election Integrity Scorecard gives Utah a relatively poor ranking—53 out of 100. Utah gets poor marks for its "absentee ballot management" and for currently not requiringa photo ID or a unique identifier when participating in vote by mail, among other criteria.
"As [the] Utah House GOP championed a bill to effectively end vote by mail, I kept hearing one organization repeatedly cited: The Heritage Foundation," wrote Emily Anderson Stern, a reporter for The Salt Lake Tribune, wrote on Bluesky.
"While pushing for an end to Utah's universal vote-by-mail election system, state lawmakers—including House Speaker Mike Schultz—have repeatedly relied on the Heritage Foundation's policy perspectives, referencing them in public debate, interviews, promotional materials, and social media posts," according to reporting published by Anderson Stern last week.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular