It’s possible to initiate such cuts, but whether they stay cut after the inevitable legal battles remains to be see …
For it to be actionable, it will require congressional approval, as the GAO and the rest of the American civil service's operations are already codified in law - not executive order.
The real question is how the incoming administration plans on effecting such a desire on such a huge number of people.
The US system has been designed this way for over a century after the spoils system became unpopular.
Also, I've bumped into you multiple times on this forum talking about governance, and while I appreciate the zeal PLEASE read an introductory book on Civics - you seem to have a cursory understanding of how governments are designed.
I'd recommend the AP Gov curriculum for the US.
Who are you to decide for other HN users what they know or don’t know?
And why do your opinions even matter in determining what other HN users know about ‘governance’ or ‘how governments are designed’?
My opinions don't matter, but the fact that you make very basic mistakes around how checks and balances work, as well as how institutions are run in the US seems to show this lack of elementary understanding of civics.
If you just want to kvetch, so be it.
But if you want to have an actual serious discussion about these topics, actually understand these intricacies.
It doesn’t make sense to continue writing the same opinions after self declaring those opinions don’t matter…?
Declaring your opinions are ‘facts’ in an HN reply, doesn’t magically transform or transmute them into bonafide facts…
So this seems about as coherent as random LLM output.
Edit: And I can also declare the above to be a ‘fact’… and it will carry the same weight too.
Now no executive in my lifetime has ever shied away from spending every dime they could squeeze out of Congress, but maybe this one will be different.