Rep. Byron Donalds responds to a question at his town hall meeting in Estero on Monday. (Photo: Author)
April 24, 2025 by David Silverberg
The town hall meeting of Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.) held at Estero High School is now in the history books.
This was a lot different from his previous town halls. Not only did it generate a lively turnout, it attracted major media, including CNN, and it was covered extensively by local media, which often give scant coverage to politics. It was raucous and rambunctious and that’s where most of the coverage focused.
But it was a political event a cut above the run of the mill in Southwest Florida and given that Donalds is a declared candidate for governor it provided some indicators of the kind of governor he would be.
So what were the broader implications of the meeting, what deeper lessons can be derived from it, and what did it reveal about the politician, the political dynamic in the district, the state and the nation?
Reading the room
A view of the audience just prior to the start of the meeting. (Photo: Author)
After initial indications that the meeting would be highly restricted, when the event occurred it appeared that virtually anyone who wanted to get in could do so. Even with that, the hall was not filled. This author estimates the crowd at 300 to 400.
An indication of the strength of Donalds’ supporters came early when he came out on stage and they gave him a standing ovation. From this author’s vantage, those standing appeared to constitute a quarter of the audience at most.
Questions were written out on cards and the questioners in the audience were named and acknowledged when the questions were asked. This author counted 18 questions being formally asked during the session. Other questions were shouted from the audience, which Donalds occasionally answered as well. Most questions received lengthy answers.
Other than welcoming the audience and thanking the people who arranged the meeting, Donalds did not make any opening statement other than to say he was not going to get into politics (in the sense of purely partisan discussion) and he was not going to address his gubernatorial bid. Instead he opted to go right to the first question. That question, his answer and the audience’s response set the tone and was a precursor of the direction the rest of the meeting would take.
The question was: “As a member of the Oversight Committee, what oversights are you imposing on Elon Musk and DOGE [Department of Government Efficiency]?”
The question brought prolonged, vigorous applause and cheers. “You like that question,” Donalds joked. He answered that Musk was a special White House employee, similar to others that had been appointed by previous administrations. He specifically mentioned President Barack Obama’s appointment of former senator John Kerry as “climate czar” in his administration to deal with climate change issues.
Because DOGE was not run with congressionally appropriated funds, Donalds said, it was outside the House Oversight Committee’s purview.
“What DOGE is doing right now is they’re going through every agency and they’re examining any contracts or any inefficiencies in spending federal dollars,” he said but was interrupted by shouts and expressions of disagreement, with people pointing out DOGE’s mass layoffs and disruption of government operations.
Donalds’ answer and the response began an uproar that never really died down and Donalds never regained full control of the proceedings.
Nonetheless, he compared DOGE’s actions to those taken by President Barack Obama to increase government efficiency. This kicked the uproar into a higher gear and intensity. “You cannot deny that President Obama famously said that he wanted to examine efficiency or lack thereof in the government. Elon Musk is doing the exact same thing,” which elicited even louder expressions of outrage.
“The Oversight Committee is doing the responsible thing, we are letting DOGE complete its work,” he said. “Most of the budget cuts that DOGE will present have to go through the appropriations process. It goes through the Appropriations Committee and most of the judgments of federal spending will occur there and then get an up or down vote in the Appropriations Committee first and then on the floor of the House” before moving to final approval. “That is the process.”
As he was saying this the calls and shouts from the crowd were mounting in volume, complaining that he wasn’t addressing the broader issues created by Musk and DOGE.
But Donalds continued his defense. “Now, it is actually clear that from the President, who is the unitary executive under our system of government…he wants [Musk] to work in the federal government. So, I find it interesting that people who are upset about Elon right now, were not upset, as I brought up earlier, when John Kerry was going around” doing work for the Obama administration as a special employee.
After trying to calm the crowd, Donalds continued. “Here is the last thing. There is a report that comes out every single year. This is the GAO [Government Accountability Office] report. The GAO report, every single year, says the government wastes more than 250 billion dollars a year. 250 billion!” which also elicited shouts of dismissal. “Over the last 20 years the federal government has wasted 3 trillion dollars. (More about GAO and its report below.)
“I believe that it is in the interests of the people of Southwest Florida and of the United States to examine all inefficiencies in the federal government,” which elicited prolonged applause from his supporters. “If there are concerns [it is] that Elon Musk and his team are going through agencies and cancelling contracts that are inefficient”—which brought an outburst of disagreement from the rest of the crowd.
“When appropriations language is ready, under federal law today, Congress has given discretion to the secretaries of the various Cabinet agencies. So what the DOGE is actually doing is that they are working with Cabinet-level secretaries, who have all been confirmed by the United States Senate, to bring their findings to that secretary and then that secretary is the one who is making the decision because the authority has been given to the Cabinet secretary by Congress. You may not like it but that’s the way the law is written.”
After some of the shouting died down from that, he continued: “As a member of Congress, I actually believe that Congress should not give discretion to the federal agencies, no matter who’s president and Congress should actually prescribe how money is spent in the federal government but the Congress has been derelict in its duty and allowed money to go through the federal branch, the executive branch, and they have given full discretion to the executive branch, which goes around Congress and goes around these issues in the United States of America.”
He continued: “This is where there’s a little bit—a little bit—of public perception. If you examine broad-based polling on government efficiencies, it is popular with the American people.”
Then, he asked a question of his own: “For those in the room upset about DOGE; are you going to be upset when DOGE gets to the Department of Defense?” There was a resounding affirmative response. Then he repeated the question and the response rose higher. “Every recommendation that DOGE makes, is approved by the Cabinet-level secretary and confirmed by the United States Senate.”
Then he stated, “At the Oversight Committee we have to actually observe DOGE do its work first and we’re in the process of doing this, number one. Number two, for true accountability if we truly believe it’s necessary true accountability for DOGE will be found in the appropriations process. At that point, any recommendations that DOGE has made, the Cabinet-level secretary will be reflected in budgetary requests and it will get an up or down vote through the appropriations process.”
Answering that question took approximately 7 minutes.
Analysis: Call and response
Elon Musk wields a chain saw at a meeting of the Conservative Political Action Committee on Feb. 20, 2025 (Photo: Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons)
The entire event took about 90 minutes. It is beyond the scope of this essay to recount every question and answer. (The full meeting can be seen in a 1-hour, 30-minute video on YouTube posted by Forbes magazine. Fair warning: the audio is poor and ads precede the video. Donalds also posted a full video on his Facebook page, also with poor sound.)
All the media coverage of the meeting has focused on its raucousness and the anger of the audience. A major question, though, is: why was it so raucous and why were constituents so angry?
It was not because there was any kind of advance planning or “astroturfing” (paid disruptors) to cause chaos. Rather, as was clear from the very first question and answer there was a yawning reality gulf between Donalds and his audience.
Each appeared to exist in a separate universe and there was little to no connection between them. Donalds’ answers, which uniformly defended President Donald Trump, Elon Musk and the regime, also presented a picture that, while presented as factual, was completely at odds with the reality understood and experienced by constituents.
As shown in the first answer, Donalds was putting DOGE in the context of the congressional appropriations process and addressing it as a regular budgetary process. But the audience, like the rest of the American public, is experiencing DOGE as a furious, unchecked, personally-directed purge of the federal government, with massive layoffs, severe cuts to services, disruption of orderly processes, threats to mandated benefits and intrusion into personal information.
Donalds would not acknowledge or address these concerns among his constituents. Instead, he blindly recited the Trumpist catechism and defended the regime’s actions. He did not provide even a hint of sympathy or understanding for constituent concerns. His approach was that if he explained it, or in the phrase he repeatedly used, “if we’re intellectually honest,” it would be sufficient.
He also repeated assertions that were wildly at variance with what the rest of the audience understood to be the truth, prompting amazement and outrage.
(At this point it seems appropriate to address some of the inaccuracies and misconceptions in Donalds’ first answer.
For example, there is no equivalency between previous special presidential employees and Elon Musk. John Kerry was Special Presidential Envoy for Climate of the United States from 2021 to 2024. He represented the United States in climate forums and made recommendations to other government agencies to accommodate climate issues. He did this as a highly qualified former US senator and secretary of state. There were no instant layoffs, agency closings or data intrusions at his command. Elon Musk is a private citizen and profit-driven entrepreneur with no prior government background who has physically wielded a chainsaw to demonstrate his approach to government operations.
The GAO report referenced by Donalds is the annual report on federal programs with fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative goals or actions. As part of its mandate GAO annually suggests hundreds of ways to address problems, reduce costs and boost revenue. It makes suggestions, often of a very technical or financial nature, for achieving those ends. In the 2024 report it made 112 suggestions, recommending for example that “Congress and the Internal Revenue Service should take action to improve sole proprietor tax compliance, which could increase revenue by hundreds of millions of dollars per year,” or saving money by “using predictive models to make investment decisions on deferred maintenance and repair for federal buildings and structures.” It has never recommended—much less imposed—abruptly closing down entire agencies or making mass layoffs. Even so it estimates that its recommendations have saved the US government $667 billion over the past 13 years.
Also, if DOGE and Musk were really just making recommendations to be worked through the appropriations process, all the closings and layoffs would be submitted as recommendations to Congress for consideration during the normal 2025 appropriations process. They would not be implemented until the 2026 fiscal year. They would be examined, debated and then approved by Congress, and conducted in an orderly fashion, not suddenly imposed by executive fiat and lockouts.)
Other assertions that Donalds made during the meeting were:
That the answer to gun violence lies in mental health care rather than any kind of gun restrictions or red flag laws, which he opposes. “It always goes back to the mental health of the shooter,” he said.
That DOGE/Musk access to Social Security information is equivalent to the access allowed to 53 students under President Joe Biden’s administration. (Donalds didn’t elaborate on the source of this information and it is nowhere else on the Internet that this author could discern. It’s not clear whether these alleged 53 students were interns at the Social Security Administration, when, why or where this happened or what they accessed.) As Donalds put it: “It is not intellectually honest to be upset with Elon Musk and not with the 53 students.”
That DOGE/Musk are examining Social Security files to find waste, fraud and abuse and have found 300 alleged recipients over the age of 100. (This claim was debunked by Leland Dudek, the acting commissioner, who said in February that the raw numbers did not reflect actual benefits being paid and that only 89,106 people older than 100 years were listed on Social Security rolls as of December 2024. “The reported data are people in our records with a Social Security number who do not have a date of death associated with their record. These individuals are not necessarily receiving benefits.”)
That the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB) is unconstitutional and uncontrolled by Congress. “I want to get rid of the CFPB, it is a rogue agency” and “a terrible agency,” he said.
That Trump’s tariffs are “re-setting the balance of global trade.”
That nuclear power should be the future source of energy in Florida rather than solar power, which Donalds said does not produce sufficient energy. Also, he said discarding and recycling solar equipment is ultimately dirtier and more polluting than nuclear power.
That 60 percent of phone calls to the Social Security Administration for assistance are fraudulent.
That the problem with diversity, equity and intrusion (DEI) lies in the equity portion, since life is inherently inequitable and that DEI programs and practices do not level the playing field. “Equity is an impossible standard to achieve,” he said. The only time Donalds became angry and emotional was when he was giving this answer, which he took personally.
That the US Agency for International Development (US AID) was pursuing programs that were not in the American interest and were even treasonous.
That the No Rogue Rulings Act (House Resolution (HR) 1526), which would restrict the ability of federal district judges to issue national injunctions, and passed by the US House on April 10 with Donalds’ vote, would not pass the Senate.
That illegal aliens have more rights and due process entitlements than American citizens. He charged that President Joe Biden abused the asylum process. Donalds said that he supports illegal alien deportations.
That parents and “community members” have a right to inspect school instructional materials, because they make up the bulk of the taxpaying base but that school boards have final say.
That President Donald Trump has pledged not to touch Social Security and it will not be subject to congressional budget reconciliation but that if it becomes insolvent there will be an automatic cut, so it must be reformed.
That he missed votes in Congress because he was campaigning for Trump.
That he does not vote party when in Congress but “I vote the Constitution.”
That Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth did not violate the Espionage Act when he shared classified operational intelligence in Signal chats.
The most dramatic moment in the meeting occurred when a question was asked whether Israel’s cutoff of water and food to the Palestinians of Gaza was a war crime, along with the deaths of 35,000 Gazans.
Donalds answered that the 35,000 casualty figure was from Hamas, that Israel had been careful in its strikes on Gaza, that Hamas was using both Israeli hostages and civilian Gazans as human shields and Israeli forces had warned them before striking.
He said that the United States would have reacted similarly if Mexican drug cartels had taken American hostages in the United States. “On October 7, it was not an Israeli incursion into Gaza, it was Hamas that incurred into Israel,” he said. “We should stand behind Israel 100 percent and make sure the hostages come home. My stance is to stand by our ally.”
This answer prompted an audience member to stand up and loudly protest on behalf of the Palestinians. She continued to do so until a security officer approached her to remove her and she left of her own volition.
An audience member protests on behalf of Palestinians. (Photo: Author)
Analysis: Omens and portents
First, credit must be given where credit is due: Byron Donalds did not have to hold this town hall meeting at all.
It was a risky idea from the start and no doubt there were voices in his camp arguing against it. He could have easily let it slide and been none the worse for wear. In fact, the head of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee has recommended that all Republican members of Congress avoid town hall meetings and Donalds could have followed his guidance.
He could have made the meeting a gubernatorial campaign rally but he did not. Nor did the questions seem to be filtered to avoid challenges or controversy.
Beyond subjecting himself to angry constituents, Donalds risked damaging his gubernatorial campaign. Whether the meeting proves detrimental or provides useful publicity remains to be seen but it certainly gave him some local and national headlines.
Contrary to some of those headlines the meeting was not “chaotic” or “in chaos.” Chaos is when punches are thrown, the benches empty and the police charge in with tear gas and tasers. This was certainly rancorous and at times disorderly but it was hardly chaotic. Most people stayed in their seats except when they got up and left, which a significant contingent did early.
But, as stated earlier, what was really in evidence was the vast gulf in the realities between constituents and their congressman.
It was obvious that much of the audience reaction was driven by fear, outrage and worry. The repeated questions about Social Security and DOGE showed key points of concern.
That fear is also fueled by the man in the White House and the tone of hatred, prejudice and rage he exudes to the nation. The day before, those attitudes were on full display in an Easter greeting on the X platform.
President Donald Trump’s Easter greeting on X.
It was no wonder that constituents were fearful, angry and loud in their turn.
A more skillful or empathetic politician would have acknowledged the concerns and explained what he or she was doing to allay them or seek solutions. A more accomplished congressman might have told the audience what he or she was doing on their behalf.
But that was not the approach Donalds took. He was there to recite the Trumpist creed, not connect with the audience. For every question about the activities of Trump, Musk or DOGE he responded with Trumpist talking points and standard Make America Great Again fodder that was often at odds with the audience’s general perception of reality. Several times when challenged about Trump or Musk actions Donalds took refuge in a “whataboutism” response: what about John Kerry? What about the alleged 53 students?
In fact, Donalds’ true constituents appeared to be Donald Trump and Elon Musk. They, at least, will likely be pleased with the meeting results.
Donalds did not reveal himself to be a deep or original thinker in this regard.
After the meeting Donalds was interviewed by the media.
“How do you feel about being a congressman tonight?” asked WINK TV reporter Claire Galt.
“Great. Look, this is part of the reason I signed up for the job a couple of years ago. I do think it’s important to bring information to the electorate,” he replied.
“Did it surprise you?”
“No. I don’t get surprised by much anymore,” he smiled. “You know, you just kind of deal with it as it comes. I could tell from the first question or two what kind of night it was going to be. But that’s alright, it’s part of the business.”
It was a mature and professional answer. It’s also one Donalds should get accustomed to giving—because as long as he remains a faithful Trumpist as he pursues the governorship there are going to be many more nights like the one in Estero.
Rep. Byron Donalds interviewed after his town hall meeting. (Image: WINK TV)
To see all The Paradise Progressive’s past coverage of Rep. Byron Donalds, click here.
Liberty lives in light
© 2025 by David Silverberg
Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!