First of thanks for the clear articulation opposing funding finding its way to place it shouldn't. Many here only lament the data collection process, avoiding discussion of the waste and absurdity of some of things uncovered. So I applaud you for acknowledging there is a real problem here.

The DOGE effort would benefit from more resources and if some of those resources come in the form of professional auditors then that would be great. But if they are coming with a "Step aside Sonny, the pros are here now" attitude and try to take over policy, then no.

When a check is written to entities such as the Central American Gender Assessment Consultant Service or the Women in Forests Carbon Initiative Mentorship Program, we don't need a professional auditor to certify what common sense already tells us.