Photo credit: www.govexec.com

Inside Project 2025: Training Videos Highlight Republican Plans for Federal Appointments

A recent collection of training videos aimed at prospective political appointees for a potential future Republican administration has surfaced, shedding light on the strategies of the Project 2025 transition project. The videos imply a desire for increased “political control” over federal agencies, although they do not explicitly outline the GOP’s intentions for the civil service framework.

These videos were revealed in a report from ProPublica and Documented. Despite the Trump administration’s attempts to distance itself from this controversial initiative, which is backed by the Heritage Foundation, the project has been developed with contributions from numerous former high-ranking officials from President Trump’s first term. As part of this initiative, a comprehensive 900-page policy proposal, known as the Mandate for Leadership, was created, alongside a database intended to compile information on 20,000 potential political appointees for future roles.

Both the Project 2025 initiative and the Trump campaign maintain a focus on federal staffing policies, particularly emphasizing the reinstatement of Schedule F. This policy, introduced in October 2020, aimed to convert numerous federal employees in “policy-related” roles to at-will positions, which could ultimately diminish their job protections. Although President Biden rescinded this initiative upon taking office, conservative factions continue to advocate for its re-establishment, compiling lists of thousands of employees targeted for conversion and potential dismissal.

In a training segment titled “The Federal Workforce,” Spencer Chretien, who is both an associate director of Project 2025 and a former presidential personnel official, suggests that a mere 3,000 to 4,000 political appointees are insufficient to adequately influence federal operations. He raises concerns about accountability, highlighting the potential for a substantial number of federal employees to oppose a sitting president’s agenda.

“What does the number suggest about accountability to the people who really matter: the voters?” he queries, advocating for an increase in the political appointee pool. Chretien also critiques perspectives on restraining the number of political positions, arguing that such limitations would stifle conservative reforms.

Kaitlin Stumpf, who worked under Chretien, echoed the sentiment of ensuring political oversight, particularly over the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which handles the appointments process for federal positions. According to Stumpf, retaining political influence over OPM is crucial to overcoming resistance from career civil servants who might impede presidential initiatives.

“There were several career employees in powerful positions who hindered the work of the president and his staff,” she asserts, emphasizing that these individuals were later succeeded by political appointees who aligned with the administration’s goals.

In various segments, former Trump administration members express negative views toward career civil servants. For instance, Bethany Kozma, a former deputy chief of staff at USAID, alleged that she faced hostility from career employees, claiming that they contributed to a negative media portrayal of her based on her previous advocacy for anti-LGBTQ policies.

“I had a huge target on my back,” she stated, pointing to what she perceived as systematic opposition from entrenched career staff.

Conversely, other former officials observed that once familiarity with the federal culture and procedures was established, many career employees were more cooperative than initially anticipated. Max Primorac, who also served at USAID, highlighted the learning curve involved in government operations and stressed the importance of being respectful and diligent in order to gain the trust of the bureaucratic staff.

“When you show yourself to be competent and respectful, you’re going to have folks in the bureaucracy, some who won’t agree with you, but because they actually do subscribe to the notion that public service is beyond politics… they’re going to come out and start helping you,” Primorac explained.

Source
www.govexec.com