Even as many conservatives and libertarians celebrate the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) exposure of corrupt and reckless spending, many of those same Americans wonder why most politicians don’t discuss the immoral predicate of taking our money in the first place, and why they don’t focus on the US Constitution, which, if DC hewed to it, would eliminate nearly all of the government fat funded by our taxes and inflationary fiat currency.
In the same vein, many people see the DOGE news, hear the GOP rhetoric about government “efficiency,” and wonder why the GOP-led government actually is not decreasing the U.S. budget, which is $2 TRILLION more than the previous budget, and which, as Thomas Massie has noted, will add $328 billion to the deficit this year, and, in 10 years, will add $20 trillion to the already $36 trillion national debt.
Thus, it seems as if hearty skepticism is warranted when reading or hearing about the latest, supposedly DOGE-based, move to “sell off” federal buildings.
According to the New American’s Veronika Kyrylenko, the feds are ready to “liquidate,” as Dorothy did to the Wicked Witch of the West in “Oz.”
“The Trump administration is moving to sell off hundreds of federal office buildings as part of a broader push to privatize government assets.”
Sounds good, right? Fewer federal office buildings, perhaps – PERHAPS – fewer functionaries to fill them, leading to a freer, more prosperous American population.
She adds:
“According to a Fortune investigation, the initiative, led by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), follows a private equity playbook: sell real estate now, lease it back later.
Major government contractor and DOGE figurehead billionaire Elon Musk made it clear in a February cabinet meeting: ‘Anything that can reasonably be privatized should be privatized.’”
Heck, given Mr. Musk’s statement, that sounds even better!
But, alas. It’s not better. In some cases, this is a fake-out, a DOGE-masked dodge.
In fact, the cash-ravenous charlatans in D.C. plan to “sell” the buildings to make a quick buck, then rent the spaces from the entities who purchased them.
“This, apparently, includes the J. Edgar Hoover Building (FBI headquarters), Veterans Affairs offices, and buildings housing senators’ offices in Boston and Chicago, according to Fortune. While only two dozen buildings are officially listed for sale, The Washington Post confirmed that ‘officials are quietly moving ahead with a push to sell hundreds of publicly owned buildings to private companies — which can then lease them back to the government[.]’”
Yep. Short-term gain. Long-term expense. Short-term, superficial, public-relations-satisfying appearances, versus locked-in, unmoving, ever-expanding government bureaucracy at our expense and, in many cases, with profound disrespect for the U.S. Constitution.
If you get the vibe, you’re not alone.
“Experts warn the plan could backfire. While the government may receive an immediate cash influx, it sacrifices long-term control over public infrastructure. Fortune quotes, ‘It’s great to get this big slug of money upfront when you sell the building but if you’re going to be leasing the building back for a period of time you’ve lost control of the real estate,’ said Kevan Ventura, a principal in the real estate practice of law firm Goldberg Kohn.
Ventura questioned the fiscal logic: ‘Are your lease costs eventually going to outstrip what you made in profit?’”
And there are other problems.
In enclaves of economic-instructors, we often discuss the problem of “Rent-Seeking,” by which special interests connect themselves to government power at the expense of competitors and consumers.
It is possible that we may discover powerful ties between the figures who purchase, then lease, the buildings, and politicians or bureaucrats in Washington.
Related: Politico’s ‘Scoop’ About Musk ‘Is Garbage,’ WH’s Karoline Leavitt Says
In fact, given the disastrous state of the real estate market (thanks to central banking, government regulations, lockdowns, federal spending, warfare, federal borrowing, and taxation), these sales come as office property values are tanking, liquidation sales are increasing, and the future expenses for rent will rise after the market corrects.
Notes Kyrylenko:
“Adding to the concern, commercial real estate values remain low, especially in D.C. Ermengarde Jabir, director of economic research at Moody’s Analytics, said in an email to Fortune,
“So many buildings have sold at deep discounts in recent months, particularly in the Washington, D.C. area, [that] corporate office landlords might be more hesitant at the moment to purchase office properties without quite knowing where or if values in the office market have bottomed out.”
And when the feds enter the market to add to the supply of “goods”, they compete against the already desperate private market.
“She added that dumping multiple government buildings on the market could further depress prices.”
The plan obviously has proponents and detractors, and the directive came from “on high.”
“On February 26, President Trump signed an executive order directing agencies to cut waste and slash spending. The order required each agency to ‘review all existing covered contracts and grants and, where appropriate … terminate or modify’ them — and to do it all ‘in consultation with the agency’s DOGE Team Lead.’
It didn’t stop there. Section 3(g) of the order targeted federal property directly. Agencies had to update real estate inventories, review their lease termination options, and — critically — begin preparing to unload real estate ‘no longer needed.’ The president gave the GSA — (General Services Administration) the agency responsible for managing federal real estate — 60 days to submit a full disposition plan to the White House budget office.
A week later, the GSA publicly announced it would begin selling more than 440 buildings deemed ‘non-core,’ with the stated goal of ‘potentially’ saving ‘more than $430 million in annual operating costs.’
The directive was clear: shrink the government’s physical footprint and do it with DOGE’s oversight. The rest — lists posted, revised, and removed — is just execution.”
But unless they actually decrease the size of this ever-growing federal leviathan, the Trump team and Congress will merely set us up for more burdens.
Certainly, some functionaries might work from home, but Trump wants federal workers to be in-office, so the “telecommuting” savings (if there are any, given productivity losses for home-based workers) won’t continue.
Like a sketchy restaurant, the takeaways from this on-the-menu idea remain elusive, worrisome, and highly debated. But one thing is certain.
Kyrylenko notes that the GSA “owns and leases roughly 8,400 buildings.”
Each of them is a monument to our enslavement.
Many politicians see us as their property, and the growth of these government temples is the result. That is something to remember, as the DOGE-inspired “sale-and-rent” move goes forward.