WASHINGTON, D.C. — Wyoming’s congressional delegation is siding with President Donald Trump in his efforts to cut federal government spending on a massive scale, as opponents continue to unleash court challenges to those downsizing initiatives.
The controversy centers on Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, as well as funding-related orders issued directly by the president. Billions of tax dollars annually along with millions of jobs across nearly all federal agencies are on the line.
“President Trump campaigned on draining the swamp — and that’s exactly what DOGE is doing,” Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, told Cowboy State Daily. “The federal government is too big and spends too much. It’s time to take a good look at how every penny of hardworking taxpayer money is being spent.
“Congress will work with DOGE to keep key programs operational while addressing reckless and wasteful Washington spending.”
Substantial job cuts and grant-fund freezes have already happened. DOGE’s website claims the department has saved nearly $46 billion as of Friday. The website is not a government website and notes that its data is not official.
The lawsuits over the cost-slashing have been filed in federal district courts in Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island and Washington, D.C.
The Boston-based First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has weighed in on one of them. So far, judges’ rulings have been mixed, and no hearings have been set in at least two cases filed this week.
The lawsuits — brought by attorneys general in Democrat-led states, along with public employee unions and others — argue that Musk lacks the authority to carry out the dismantling of agencies and that Trump is violating worker protections. Some Democrats in Congress are making the same claims.
“Really, what the heck is going on here?” U.S. Rep. Melanie Stansbury, D-New Mexico, said at a hearing held Wednesday by a House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee. “We’re not trying to take down Elon Musk as a businessman. This dude is literally breaking the law inside of the federal government.”
Lummis, Hageman
But in addition to Barrasso, Republicans like Wyoming’s other federal lawmakers, U.S. Sen. Cynthia Lummis and U.S. Rep. Harriet Hageman,remain unmoved by the backlash.
Lummis applauds the administration’s moves to erase diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs.
“The people of Wyoming are thrilled to see President Trump and Elon Musk get to work rooting out waste, fraud and abuse within our government,” Lummis told Cowboy State Daily. “Tax dollars should be spent responsibly — not wasted on far-left, DEI projects chosen by unelected government bureaucrats.”
Lummis took to the Senate floor last week to say Wyomingites are pleased by the cost-cutting spree.
“The people of Wyoming are grateful. I hear it when I go home,” she said. “I see it in their eyes. People will come up to me in the feed store, in the grocery store, and say they’re grateful for President Trump for creating DOGE. They’re grateful for the patriots working hard at DOGE.
“Speaking on behalf of the people of Wyoming, I want to say thank you. Thank you, President Trump, for bringing in a group of people to help us shine a light on how we can make America better.”
Hageman, a lawyer who serves on the House Judiciary Committee, weighed in Thursday during an interview on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal.”
“What I would ask is, how is [Musk] breaking the law? Nobody seems to be asking that question,” Hageman said. “He has been appointed by the president … and tasked with going in and looking at how the government is spending money. He is doing that. I cannot for the life of me figure out how that would be breaking the law.”
The show’s host, Mimi Geerges, asked Hageman for her take on comments by Musk and other Trump allies “attacking, essentially, the federal judiciary” over rulings against the administration.
“I’m going to disagree with your basic premise. I don’t see it as an attack,” Hageman responded. “I think in our form of government, we’re able to criticize anyone who’s in public service, whether they are in the judiciary, the executive or the legislative branch.
“I think it’s perfectly appropriate to criticize a decision if you disagree with it, and in fact as an attorney, I’ve done that in the past with judges that I have had.”
She added that the Trump administration would appeal rulings that it lost, rather than defy the rulings.
“It isn’t that they’re going to defy them,” she said. “They’re going to appeal them up through the process. The president has already said that. We know that’s what the Department of Justice is going to do, and that’s the correct process to follow.”
Running For President?
In addition to answering questions from Geerges on a variety of topics, Hageman spoke with viewers who called in to the show.
One of the callers identified himself as Joe, an independent voter from Hackensack, New Jersey.
“Ms. Hageman, I was just wondering, listening to you, you are such a breath of fresh air,” he said. “Have you ever considered, for 2028, running for president?”
Hageman laughed and replied, “Joe, you’re so kind. I like representing Wyoming right now, but thank you for the compliments.”
Geerges then moved on to another caller.
