States Must Form Efficiency Panels by 2026 to Keep Most Federal Funds Under New Bill

This proposed legislation, dubbed the "State-Level DOGE Establishment Act," essentially tells states: set up a specific kind of government efficiency watchdog panel, or risk losing out on a chunk of federal money starting in fiscal year 2026. The bill ties eligibility for most discretionary federal appropriations (think funding for things beyond essentials like national security) to the creation of these state-level efficiency departments or commissions.

The New Price of Admission: Efficiency Panels

So, what do these panels look like? According to the bill, each state needs to establish an entity with 10 to 20 members. Here's the catch designed to ensure balance, or perhaps stalemate: the panel must have an equal number of members appointed by the majority and minority parties in the state legislature. These newly formed bodies won't just be meeting for coffee; they have a mandate. Their job is to figure out how federal dollars flowing into the state can be used more efficiently.

Show Your Work: Annual Reports Required

These state efficiency panels aren't just required to exist; they need to produce results, or at least document their efforts. Annually, each panel must publish a report on the state's public website detailing its work and providing recommendations for improving the efficiency of federal fund usage. A copy also gets sent up to a federal "Department of Government Efficiency" (though the bill focuses on state requirements). This means states will need to dedicate resources not just to running these panels but also to researching, writing, and publishing these yearly reports.

What Does 'Efficient' Mean, Anyway?

Here’s where things get a bit fuzzy. The bill requires these panels to improve "efficiency," but it doesn't actually define the term. Does it mean cutting costs, speeding up services, reducing waste, achieving better outcomes, or something else entirely? This lack of clarity could lead to vastly different approaches across states – some might focus purely on budget cuts, while others might target bureaucratic processes. It also opens the door for political maneuvering, as "efficiency" can be interpreted to fit various agendas. Plus, setting up and running these panels costs money, potentially creating a new layer of state bureaucracy that might, ironically, need its own efficiency review down the line. States, especially smaller ones, might find this an added financial and administrative burden.