Home » Policy by Issue » Federal Employees

Federal Employees

Summary of Impacts

Project 2025 recommends reducing environmental regulations on business which will lead to higher emissions and environmental harm. It suggests withdrawing from international environmental agreements which will lead to the breakdown of global efforts to fight climate change. It aims to cut funding for research into climate change and renewable energy, weakening future technological innovation.

Key Quotes

“Remove the U.S. from any association with U.N. and other efforts to push sustainable-development schemes connected to food production”
(Bakst 325)

“Revisit the designation of PFAS chemicals as ‘hazardous substances'”
(Gunasekara Page 463)

“Make the design, development, and deployment of new nuclear warheads a top priority.”
(McNamee 430)

Impacts on Federal Employees

Project 2025 proposes a number of policies that could greatly impact federal employees in several ways. One significant change involves overhauling hiring practices to focus more on political loyalty and alignment with the administration’s goals. While this aims to ensure that employees support the administration’s vision, it may also lead to a more politicized workforce where political beliefs are prioritized over experience and qualifications. This could create job insecurity for employees perceived as not aligned with the administration.

The playbook also suggests expanding religious freedom protections for federal employees. While this could help protect individuals’ religious rights, it might also result in conflicts and discrimination, particularly against LGBTQIA+ employees and those from minority religious backgrounds.

The emphasis on religious protections could create a less inclusive work environment, making some federal employees feel excluded or discriminated against based on their identity or beliefs.

Additionally, Project 2025 emphasizes streamlining administrative procedures and increasing accountability. This includes stricter performance evaluations and potentially higher turnover rates for employees whose work does not align with the administration’s goals. Federal employees might face increased job insecurity and a tense work environment, with the risk of dismissal if their performance is viewed as not supporting the administration’s objectives. Overall, these changes could lead to a more politicized, less secure and inclusive work environment for federal employees.

Quotes from the Mandate

Page numbers refer to the Mandate for Leadership PDF

“DOL should rescind the persuader rule once again should the Biden Administration revive it.” (General Welfare, Dept. of Labor, Page 634)

The Persuader Rule requires employers and their advisors (including lawyers and consultants) to file public reports disclosing any advice that “indirectly persuades” employees regarding union organizing or collective bargaining. Prior to this rule, these reports were required only when an advisor made direct contact with employees.
Ending the rule against persuading workers not to join unions would make it harder for employees to know when employers are trying to stop them from forming unions. This could hurt workers by letting employers secretly hire people to discourage unionizing, which is bad news for workers’ rights to organize and negotiate together. It’s especially unfair to marginalized workers who already face discrimination and exploitation at work.

“Eliminate the Clean Energy Corps by revoking funding and eliminating all positions and personnel hired under the program.” (General Welfare, Dept. of Energy, Page 418)

The Clean Energy Corps aims to research, develop, demonstrate, and deploy clean energy solutions. Project 2025’s proposed policy is harmful because it undermines efforts to combat climate change, which disproportionately affects marginalized communities. Additionally, it results in job losses for federal employees.

“The Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which prioritizes government and public sector work over private sector employment, should be terminated” (General Welfare, Dept. of Education, Page 386)

The PSLF program offers student loan forgiveness for people employed full-time by government or non-profit organizations. The program is designed to encourage students to enter potentially low-paying careers like firefighting, teaching, government, nursing, public interest law, the military, and religious work. Terminating this program would impact hundreds of thousands of borrowers counting on their loans being forgiven after ten years of repayment. Additionally, calls for eliminating other types of loans (Grad PLUS, Parent PLUS) and aid (interest rate subsidies, other loan forgiveness) are included. Lastly, they want to amend the law to ensure that no administration is able to cancel student loans in the future.

“Ensure Appointees Agree with Administration Aims. Scientific agencies like NOAA are vulnerable to obstructionism of an Administration’s aims if political appointees are not wholly in sync with Administration policy. Particular attention must be paid to appointments in this area.” (Economy, Dept. of Commerce, Page 709)

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is tasked with weather forecasting, climate monitoring, oceanic and atmospheric research, and marine resource management. Since NOAA’s goal is to conserve and manage ecosystems using science as its guide, it is surprising that the author refers to their work as “obstructionism.” Perhaps, if a particular administration’s policy was hostile to the scientific method, the work of scientific agencies would feel like obstructionism. The implication, then, is that conservative political appointees in NOAA (and other scientific agencies) will halt any efforts to conserve our environment and prevent climate change. The negative effects of climate change NOAA monitors (CO2 levels, severe weather, sea level rise, etc.) will no longer be publicized or addressed, leaving all of us vulnerable (but especially marginalized communities).

“The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories.” (Economy, Dept. of Commerce, Page 696)

NOAA plays a crucial role in weather forecasting, research, satellite technology, environmental protection, and even the economy. Without a centralized agency like NOAA, coordination among different government departments, states, and private entities would be challenging, potentially leading to inefficiencies in addressing environmental issues. Privatizing or decentralizing NOAA’s functions could lead to unequal distribution of resources among different states and territories, potentially neglecting areas that need the most support. Placing NOAA under state control could undermine public trust in the agency’s ability to make decisions based on scientific evidence rather than political interests. Therefore, dismantling NOAA would not only hinder our ability to address environmental challenges but also erode the public’s confidence in government institutions responsible for protecting our planet.

“Each of the following offices should be headed by political appointees except where otherwise noted. (…) Public Housing and Tenant-Based Rental Assistance programs, authorities for Native American and Native Hawaiian housing assistance and loan guarantee programs under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHSDA).” (General Welfare, Dept. of Housing, Page 537)

These programs are critical for providing housing stability to vulnerable groups, including Native American and Native Hawaiian communities. Not only do political appointees likely lack the specialized expertise necessary to manage these programs effectively, conservative appointees espouse policies that routinely marginalize these communities. The result will be reduced support and access for those in need.