Former President Donald Trump has detailed plans for extensive federal government restructuring, should he regain the presidency. The plans include a significant reshuffling of the bureaucratic framework.
Within Trump’s proposed agenda is the commitment to deport millions of undocumented immigrants, dissolve certain government agencies, and conduct a broad replacement of thousands of federal employees with those loyal to his administration. These plans have prompted action from liberal organizations and legal experts, who are working on establishing legal and procedural protections to counter these potential measures.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has become a critical focus in this political struggle. In September, the OPM suggested a rule designed to make it harder to reclassify federal workers in a way that could result in their dismissal. This rule, expected to be finalized in April, is a notable attempt to put up defenses against a speedy overhaul by a future administration.
Political and legal analysts understand the seriousness of this situation. Michael Linden, a former executive at the White House Office of Management and Budget during President Joe Biden’s administration, expressed concerns about the scope of preemptive actions against such drastic changes.
Kevin Munoz, a spokesperson for the Biden campaign, affirmed this concern, characterizing Trump’s plans as drawn from an “authoritarian playbook.”
Norm Eisen, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former ethics counselor to President Barack Obama, has pushed for the introduction of executive orders to limit the domestic use of the military, reflecting the gravity opponents assign to these plans.
The proposed “Schedule F” reclassification, which could remove job protections from thousands of federal workers, making them vulnerable to dismissal, is central to the debate. Although President Biden revoked this order, Trump pledged to reinstate it if re-elected. Critics warn that this could multiply the number of political appointees in the federal workforce, thus undermining the merit-based civil service system.
The Heritage Foundation, a conservative research organization spearheading the “Project 2025” to prepare for a possible conservative administration, has not disclosed specific plans. However, Kevin Roberts, the foundation’s president, has publicly expressed the need for a “destruction in the government,” indicating a wish for substantial changes within federal agencies.
There is strong, varied opposition to these proposed changes. Twenty-seven advocacy organizations support the OPM’s proposed rule against easy employee reclassification. Conversely, James Sherk, a former Trump administration official and a current America First Policy Institute member, argues against the rule, contending it could obstruct presidents from executing their agendas due to bureaucratic resistance.
The discussion expands beyond workforce policies to include broader issues like agency relocation and the diminution of congressional authority.
Legal and public policy experts warn that Trump’s proposed actions could lead to the most comprehensive government overhaul in recent history, with far-reaching effects on democracy and governance.
As the political climate develops, the federal workforce is at the heart of a potential major struggle. With both sides gearing up for a legal and legislative conflict, the outcome could significantly influence federal governance for the foreseeable future, underscoring the enduring conflict between political aspiration and the ideals of a stable, efficient civil service.
