President-elect Trump’s strategy to overhaul the federal workforce is focused on giving him the authority to remove a large number of career employees and replace them with political appointees. This proposal reflects his broader goal of ensuring loyalty at every level of government.
Trump intends to revive an executive order from the end of his first term, which ended merit-based hiring for certain policy-making federal positions. His plan is to create a new class of federal workers, known as Schedule F, who would be hired and dismissed like political appointees.
The proposal has raised concerns among federal workers, who fear it could politicize government operations. Many see it as a move to reward Trump’s supporters and inject partisan interests into government decision-making.
Trump allies seek to expand political appointees in federal roles from 4,000 to 50,000
Jacqueline Simon, policy director at the American Federation of Government Employees, explained that federal employees prefer to carry out their duties free of political influence. “They want to follow the law and regulations without interference,” she said. “They don’t want to become political appointees.”
While political appointees run government agencies, most of the actual work is done by nonpartisan professionals with specialized knowledge. However, Trump’s allies envision a dramatic increase in the number of political positions, aiming for about 50,000, a rise from the current 4,000.
Ronald Sanders, who served as chair of the Federal Salary Council under Trump, resigned over the implementation of Schedule F in 2020. Sanders observed that the Trump administration sought political loyalty rather than flexibility or accountability, contrary to the order’s original intent.
Sanders pointed out the risks of hiring based on loyalty, noting, “If you put people in power simply because they’re loyal, you end up with an army of sycophants. This undermines the ability of civil servants to provide honest feedback to those in power.”
Simon highlighted the dangers of politicizing key government functions, including regulatory decisions. For example, she questioned whether environmental regulations would prioritize clean air and water or cater to political donors eager to bypass environmental protections.
She also raised concerns about the integrity of economic data, asking, “Do we want accurate, objective information on inflation and economic growth, or do we want data shaped by political agendas?”
Trump’s 2020 order justified the creation of Schedule F by asserting that departments should be able to hire staff without the restrictions of competitive service procedures. Project 2025 echoed this, arguing that frustration with top career executives drove the push for Schedule F.
A Biden administration appointee warned that eliminating professional civil service protections would undermine decision-making. The official emphasized that unbiased data and diverse perspectives are essential for sound policy choices, stating, “To dismiss expertise for political convenience is misguided.”
Trump has expressed a desire to dismantle the Department of Education and could extend the use of Schedule F to other critical agencies, including those responsible for health and environmental issues. His nominee for Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has also advocated for purging departments like the Food and Drug Administration.
Project 2025 specifically identified the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) as a prime candidate for implementing Schedule F, suggesting it could serve as a testing ground for the policy.
Ronald Sanders resigned over Schedule F, citing risks of loyalty over competency in governance
The document also discussed the potential use of the Senior Executive Service (SES) to force the reassignment of employees to unrelated roles, thereby weakening their influence. Sanders explained that reassignment could be an effective tool for removing unwanted personnel without formally firing them.
Project 2025 proposed rotating senior career leaders across different agencies to promote political loyalty. This could involve moving staff members from their core functions into completely unrelated roles, disrupting their careers.
While it is uncertain how quickly Trump could roll out his vision for Schedule F, the potential for disruption remains a concern. In response, President Biden introduced a rule in April designed to protect civil servants from Schedule F, making it difficult to remove their protections and creating a process for challenging reclassification.
Rob Shriver, deputy director of the Office of Personnel Management, stated that the rule ensures federal workers can continue to apply their expertise regardless of their political views.
However, Trump can challenge Biden’s regulation through formal rulemaking, a process that could be completed relatively quickly. Sanders acknowledged that presidents should expect federal employees to implement lawful policies but warned against using the civil service to enforce partisan agendas.
“If the goal is for employees to follow the president’s lawful policies, that’s a good thing,” Sanders said. “But if it’s to demand absolute loyalty, regardless of the law, that’s problematic.”
