Our Federal Civil Workforce Must
After 38 years in the federal workforce, I had the privilege of working alongside dedicated professionals in analytical, security, operations, policy, information technology (IT), and other critical capacities. Each person was committed to the mission of “protect and defend,” as enshrined in our Constitution. Maintaining a nonpartisan federal workforce was essential to ensuring decision-makers received the most impartial and informed perspectives.
Today, federal workforce hiring practices are being reshaped, and the potential consequences for national security remain uncertain, but troubling. Ironically, while the administration claims to prevent the politicization of federal employees, its proposed hiring guidelines risk undermining the very principles of neutrality that have long defined public service. Federal employees salute the red, white, and blue—not a party or a president.
The Founding Fathers established the three branches of government—Executive, Legislative, and Judicial—to preserve a balance of power. History.com Editors, “Three Branches of Government,” published November 17, 2017, last updated May 27, 2025.
Is this balance tipping? Chief Justice Roberts recently reminded the president that the Executive Branch does not wield more authority than the others. History has shown that dismantling these checks and balances can pave the way for autocracy, as seen in Venezuela, North Korea, China, and Russia.
The disruption within the federal civil workforce has been on both emotional and professional levels. Some employees fired under the Department of Government Operations and Efficiency (DOGE) were later rehired due to the critical nature of their roles. The bureaucratic reintegration process—including security badge reissuance, clearance reviews, and government equipment provisioning—is estimated to cost between $120 million and $480 million, according to the U.S. Digital Service. (Axios, “The Drama isn’t over for federal workers, by Emily Peck, Mar 19, 2025)
Meanwhile, new hiring guidelines proposed by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) (https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/latest-memos/merit-hiring-plan/) introduce explicit expectations of loyalty to the Executive Branch. The language in these guidelines raises fundamental concerns:
Page, one states that “the American people deserve a federal workforce dedicated to AMERICAN VALUES.” But whose values are being prioritized?
Another passage reads: “Prevent the hiring of individuals…who are unwilling to defend the Constitution or to faithfully serve the Executive Branch.”
Further, pages 9-10 outline new federal job application requirements, mandating responses to essay questions such as: “How would you help advance the president’s executive orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant executive orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you and explain how you would help implement them if hired.”
As I emphasized earlier, the civil servants of this country serve the American people—not the policy agenda of any administration. The hiring process should not be politicized.
The administration’s elimination of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives was framed as an effort to improve hiring and remove inefficiencies. However, the removal of DEI considerations undermines efforts to ensure the federal workforce reflects the diverse demographics of the American populace. Public servants are not robots; they are individuals who uphold humanity, something that appears increasingly absent from recent decision-making.
The OPM’s plan mandates the elimination of demographic statistics from hiring, recruitment, retention, and promotion decisions. Agencies will no longer track workforce composition based on race, sex, color, religion, or national origin. One federal HR official described this initiative as an obstacle for hiring managers and applicants alike.
In the rush to remove DEI principles, the administration failed to connect its process changes to tangible agency mission outcomes. As Donald Kettl, professor emeritus at the University of Maryland, pointed out, these reforms risk creating inefficiencies rather than improvements. ( “OPM ‘merit’ hiring plan includes bipartisan reforms, politicized new test,” by Erich Wagner, May 29, 2025.)
Ultimately, this shift in hiring practices prompts a fundamental question: How do we define patriotism? A federal workforce should be guided by service to the people and by the oath to the Constitution of the United States—not allegiance to political directives.
Martha Duncan is a retired DOD senior executive, with 36 years serving in the U.S. Army Reserves, as Reserve attaché, analyst, operations officer, and 3 deployments to areas of conflict.
Founded in 2016, The Steady State is a nonpartisan, nonprofit 501(c)(4) organization of more than 270 former senior national security professionals. Our membership includes former officials from the CIA, FBI, Department of State, Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security. Drawing on deep expertise across national security disciplines including intelligence, diplomacy, military affairs and law, we advocate for constitutional democracy, the rule of law and the preservation of America’s national security institutions.