In Trump’s pledge to target bureaucrats, some hear Cold War echoes

Oct 31, 2024

Donald Trump has made many campaign promises, and replacing career bureaucrats with political loyalists is far from the loudest. The Republican nominee has drawn more attention for his pledges to round up and deport scores of immigrants, prosecute his rivals and deploy soldiers against the “enemy from within.”

But the worry of civil servants shouldn’t be ignored, some Democratic lawmakers say.

“The idea of turning federal civil servants into political loyalists is frightening, whether a president is Democratic or Republican,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who has helped lead the charge against a possible return of “Schedule F.”

Trump has vowed to revive that controversial plan, which he established during his presidency with an executive order. To rid the executive branch of “rogue bureaucrats,” he argues, he needs greater authority to hire and fire.

Issued in October 2020, the executive order defined Schedule F as a new employment category for federal workers in “confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating” positions, stripping them of their civil service protections and making them easier to fire. The order, which was revoked by President Joe Biden days after he took office, could have affected tens of thousands of career civil servants, according to some estimates.

Trump wants to continue that push on “Day One” if he reclaims the White House, as part of his mission to “clean out the deep state,” according to his campaign website. While all presidents bring in their own class of political appointees to serve in top agency spots, he envisions a much broader “overhaul” aimed at removing “corrupt or poor-performing federal workers.”

The Heritage Foundation-led Project 2025, which offers a playbook for the next GOP administration, also calls for reinstating Schedule F. (Trump has sought to distance himself from the project, whose authors include some of his former aides.) Neither the Trump campaign nor the Heritage Foundation responded to requests for comment.

Meanwhile, at least one outside group has stoked fears within the federal workforce by compiling what it describes as a “watchlist.” The American Accountability Foundation, a conservative research group led by former Republican Senate staffer Tom Jones, last week published a list claiming to identify “America’s most subversive immigration bureaucrats” within the departments of Homeland Security and Justice. It also launched a tip line where suggested bureaucratic “targets” could be submitted. The group received a $100,000 award from the Heritage Foundation earlier this year.

Jones said the investigation was not launched with Schedule F in mind, though he said many of those named would likely fall under that umbrella if it were revived.

“The folks that we highlighted cannot be in a position of trust and influence in a conservative administration in the immigration space. How you get them out of that space is somebody else’s question to answer,” Jones said.

Jacqueline Simon, policy director at the American Federation of Government Employees, a union representing around 750,000 federal and D.C. employees, condemned the watchlist, as well as broader efforts to cull the federal workforce.

“If nothing else, this shows you that nobody’s overreacting. They’ve got the money, they’ve got the intention, and they’ve got the list,” Simon said. “It’s McCarthyism all over again.”

Others used the same Cold War comparison, pointing to the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy and his quest to root out those he called subversive.

“They’re just bringing back old tactics here. This is MAGA-McCarthyism,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a former constitutional law professor who is a frequent foil to Trump. “The whole point of the civil service is that people should be able to work for the government and perform their jobs without being politically intimidated and harassed.”

The Biden administration took steps during the past year to ward off a new Schedule F should Trump be elected again.

The Office of Personnel Management in April issued a rule stating an employee’s civil service protections cannot be taken away by an involuntary move from the competitive service — which includes most members of the federal workforce, who go through a competitive hiring process — to the excepted service. The rule also sought to clarify key definitions and established an appeals process for any employees who are involuntarily reclassified.

“It was certainly very well-intentioned, and it’ll provide a few obstacles initially,” Simon said.

But Kaine, too, said more should be done to gird against any return of Schedule F. “Bottom line is, regulations are good, legislation is better.”

In early 2023, Kaine introduced legislation that aims to prohibit the re-creation of a Schedule F designation and protect the merit-based federal workforce system. The bill has 18 co-sponsors but has struggled to gain momentum. He said he’ll continue to pursue it no matter the outcome of next week’s presidential election between Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris.

A companion bill in the House, introduced by Rep. Gerald E. Connolly, D-Va., has 72 co-sponsors, only four of whom are Republicans. As Virginians, both Kaine and Connolly count many federal employees among their constituents.

“Schedule F is of dire concern for federal employees, who have already lived through four years of Donald Trump’s hiring freezes, shutdowns, furloughs, and cruel personal attacks,” Connolly said in an emailed statement. “We know the utter contempt Donald Trump has for public servants. He is not worried about their lives and livelihoods. Rather, he sees them as obstacles to his own quest for power.”

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee heard similar concerns at a September hearing. Chairman Gary Peters, D-Mich., said a plan like Schedule F would be “disastrous for the American people” and “erode public trust in the government.”

Earlier this year, just 22 percent of Americans said they trusted the government in Washington to do what is right “just about always” or “most of the time,” according to polling conducted by Pew Research Center. That marked a slight uptick from 2023 results but is well below polling averages from the early 2000s.

“There’s sort of a myth and a belief, I think, that there are many problem employees and they’re not dealt with,” Jenny Mattingley, vice president of government affairs at the Partnership for Public Service, said regarding the negative view of the government.

Mattingley, a former Office of Management and Budget employee who testified at the HSGAC hearing, said there are ways to improve the federal workforce. She suggested creating stronger performance management standards for managers and holding employees accountable when there are legitimate performance issues, among other things. But politicizing the workforce, or trying to “fire one’s way to success,” would be counterproductive, she has argued.

According to Simon, the prospect of such an attempt by Trump has cast a pall over much of the federal workforce. The concern is, in part, over the potential loss of jobs. But more than that, Simon said, they fear the hollowing out of federal agencies would hurt the country.

“You don’t go and get a job at the EPA if you don’t care about clean air and clean water. You don’t get a job at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration if you don’t want to do research on climate change and its impact,” Simon said. “All these people who do this kind of work that’s been targeted are terrified of the impact of this.”