Elon Musk’s initiative, referred to as the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), is purportedly working to reform the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), aiming to implement significant staffing cuts and introduce advanced technology solutions. Recent reports reveal a troubling trend as DOGE operatives infiltrate the agency, notably through a new member, Sahil Lavingia, who is attempting to leverage AI technology to modify the agency’s systems.
Lavingia, initially spotted within the VA’s GitHub repository, is identified as an adviser to Christopher Syrek, the VA’s chief of staff. His presence raised immediate concerns among VA staff, particularly given his lack of prior government experience and his role as a startup CEO. Employees reported that he was seeking to utilize an AI tool called OpenHands to develop code for VA systems, raising alarms about data security and risk management.
Concerns heightened when sources revealed Lavingia had been granted a “zero account,” allowing him elevated access to sensitive VA systems. When questioned about his activities, Lavingia declined to provide clarity, merely stating, "I’m unpaid. And a fan of your work!”
Lavingia is not alone; he is part of a DOGE contingent that includes Cary Volpert and Christopher Roussos, both of whom possess similarly scant relevant experience in dealing with the complexities of the VA, which serves around ten million veterans. Volpert, a senior adviser, has been reviewing contracts with indications of potential cancellations, while Roussos previously helmed fitness companies and currently advises the VA.
Lawmakers, including Gerald Connolly of the House Oversight Committee, express grave concerns over DOGE’s actions, suggesting that veterans could be deprived of vital services due to leadership that lacks essential understanding of the agency’s mission.
In addition to security apprehensions, VA employees have voiced worries over organizational changes initiated by the DOGE team. These include suggestions to digitize important forms faster than is feasible and without considering the needs of an aging veteran population, many of whom are not tech-savvy. Lavingia has also proposed eliminating paper forms altogether, a drastic measure that could hinder accessibility for many veterans.
Moreover, Lavingia’s technical proposals have sparked anxiety regarding potential bugs and security flaws, given the scale of the data involved. Concerns persist that AI tools operating without proper oversight can result in critical errors or breaches which may compromise veterans’ personal information.
Despite the significant restructuring suggested by DOGE members, traditional procedures within the agency appear to be disregarded. For instance, Lavingia’s approach toward changing website operational protocols has drawn ire from staff who fear that non-expert changes may cause technical failures or unauthorized access to sensitive data.
As Lavingia initiates discussions of AI usage in contracting, employees fear the lack of security vetting could threaten both the integrity and privacy of veterans’ information. Previous instances of lax digital practices have already raised red flags among employees regarding the safeguarding of sensitive data, with specific worries over untested programming tools and coding capabilities.
Compounding the tension, Lavingia’s informal manner of suggesting rules around meeting protocols has also created discomfort. His push to digitally record meetings without prior consensus exemplifies a potential disregard for established practices within the agency.
As he continues to work with the agency, Lavingia’s dual commitments to both VA initiatives and his personal startup endeavors have provoked questions about conflicts of interest and the appropriateness of his simultaneous roles.
The atmosphere at the VA has become one of trepidation, with staff caught between a push for modernization and a commitment to protecting the welfare of those they serve. As the situation develops, the implications of DOGE’s actions remain uncertain, particularly concerning the agency’s capacity to fulfill its obligations to the veterans who depend on it.
