A month in, murmurs are arising in some corners of the Republican coalition against the provocative slash-and-burn campaign of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Maine Senator Susan Collins said DOGE is “making mistakes.” Nebraska Representative Don Bacon told DOGE to “measure twice before cutting.” Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski declared “Many of these abrupt terminations will do more harm than good.”

Now, one can argue that these voices simply represent the “Never-Trump” faction of the Republican Party, which is only continuing to lose influence—and that analysis is correct. (As an aside, Collins, from effectively blue Maine, deserves more understanding than Murkowski from red Alaska, but I digress.)

But when it comes to a simple calculation of government efficiency, the brake-pedal enthusiasts may have a point. Perhaps cutting a Securities and Exchange Commission research tool will make the government less efficient in some ways, not more. Journalists (whose salaries are often paid and sources often come from the very government agencies they defend) will certainly spend the coming weeks and years accumulating a veritable encyclopedia of defenestrated programs that “do good.”

And perhaps they do. But “doing good” does not automatically justify the expense to taxpayers.