Fraud Expert Weighs in on DOGE’s Efforts to Combat Government Waste

A recent interview with veteran fraud risk expert Linda Miller has shed light on the ongoing efforts of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an organization founded by Elon Musk, to combat government fraud and wasteful spending. Miller, in her appearance on 60 Minutes, offered a cautiously optimistic assessment of DOGE’s potential, while also emphasizing the critical distinction between fraud and wasteful spending.

Miller underscored the non-partisan nature of combating fraud, framing it as a universally shared objective. "I really think fraud is not a political issue," she stated. "This is mom and apple pie stuff. We all agree that bad actors should not be stealing American taxpayer dollars." She further elaborated that the real adversaries are not political parties but rather foreign adversarial nation-states and organized crime rings that exploit vulnerabilities in government systems to pilfer public funds.

According to Miller, DOGE has the potential to save significant sums of money if it focuses on genuine instances of fraud perpetrated by these entities. However, she cautioned against conflating fraud with wasteful spending, a distinction that appears to be blurred by DOGE’s founder, Elon Musk.

"You may not agree with what USAID does, you may not want to be investing American dollars in, you know, foreign fertilizer, for example—you may think that’s the wrong thing to be spending money on, but that’s not fraud," Miller explained. This clarification is crucial because labeling legitimate, albeit potentially controversial, government programs as "fraudulent" can undermine public trust and misdirect resources away from addressing actual criminal activities.

The 60 Minutes segment highlighted the extensive nature of government fraud, revealing that hundreds of billions of dollars are lost annually not only due to individual cases of fraudulent disability claims but also due to the sophisticated operations of international crime rings. These rings, often originating from hostile nations such as Russia and China, engage in activities like stealing disaster assistance funds, demonstrating the need for a comprehensive and internationally-focused approach to combating fraud.

Despite acknowledging that it is too early to definitively assess DOGE’s effectiveness, Miller expressed encouragement that the organization seems to be addressing relevant issues. She lauded Elon Musk’s public stance on the prevalence of government fraud, stating, "To be honest, Elon Musk coming out and saying, ‘There is a huge amount of fraud,’ I welcome that message completely because, finally, someone is actually saying this."

However, Miller’s cautiously optimistic outlook also highlights the importance of due diligence and accuracy. DOGE must be careful to avoid misrepresenting legitimate government expenditures as fraudulent activities. Their analysis must be based on rigorous research and a clear understanding of the difference between inefficiency and criminal behavior.

One area where DOGE has been active is in identifying noncitizens who have been issued Social Security numbers. Last month, Musk and DOGE volunteer Antonio Gracias revealed that over 2 million noncitizens received Social Security numbers in FY2024. They have also identified approximately 1 million noncitizens who have been issued Social Security numbers in FY2025, which began in October. While this data may be valuable in understanding the scope of Social Security distribution, it is crucial to interpret these findings within the context of existing laws and regulations.

The presence of noncitizens with Social Security numbers does not necessarily indicate fraud. Many noncitizens are legally authorized to work in the United States and are thus eligible for Social Security numbers. These can include students, temporary workers, and lawful permanent residents. Investigating whether these individuals are following the law and fulfilling their obligations is certainly within the purview of fraud prevention. However, painting everyone who fits into the category of non-citizen with a social security number as a fraudulent actor would be irresponsible and inaccurate.

In conclusion, Linda Miller’s interview offers a nuanced perspective on DOGE’s mission to combat government fraud. Her support for addressing the issue is tempered by the concern that DOGE may be conflating fraud with wasteful spending. The organization’s effectiveness will depend on its ability to accurately identify and address genuine instances of fraud perpetrated by international crime rings and other bad actors, while avoiding the temptation to mischaracterize legitimate government programs as fraudulent activities. Furthermore, DOGE’s approach should be informed by a commitment to accuracy, due diligence, and a clear understanding of the legal and regulatory frameworks governing government spending and social security eligibility. Only then can DOGE truly contribute to saving taxpayer dollars and ensuring the integrity of government programs. It’s also important to be aware that some critics say Musk might be using his DOGE organization to further his political goals, particularly in an election year. These concerns highlight the need for vigilance and transparency in DOGE’s operations to prevent the politicization of fraud prevention efforts.