- United States
- N.Y.
- Letter
Protecting sensitive government data and systems from potential misuse or unauthorized access is of utmost importance. Recent court filings reveal that a Department of Labor employee, Marko Elez, who had previously resigned from the Treasury Department over racist social media posts, has been rehired and granted read-only access to several Labor Department databases, including those related to unemployment insurance. Elez, who is detailed to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) within the White House, was also granted access to various Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) systems just weeks after an audit found he had improperly shared personally identifiable information from the Treasury Department with officials at the General Services Administration (GSA). Other DOGE staffers have been granted sweeping access to sensitive data systems across multiple agencies. Akash Bobba, another DOGE employee, is one of fewer than 50 people with the highest access to Social Security Administration data, and also has access to Office of Personnel Management and Education Department files. At HHS, DOGE staffer Luke Farritor, a GSA employee detailed to HHS, has administrator privileges for the department's grants payment management service, contracting system, and human resources management system. Edward Coristine, another GSA employee detailed to HHS, was granted access to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services payment data. While efforts to increase efficiency are laudable, granting such broad data permissions without proper oversight poses unacceptable risks. Reports of improper data sharing, even involving low-risk personally identifiable information, are deeply troubling. Urgent measures must be taken to review and restrict access privileges granted to DOGE personnel, especially those with a history of concerning behavior or statements. Clear protocols should be implemented to ensure transparency and accountability in how DOGE operates within various agencies. Modernizing government technology is a worthy goal, but it cannot come at the cost of compromising the integrity of critical systems or jeopardizing the public's trust.
