you were talking about what to the extent it does to civil service employees? guest: i was discussing blowing through the protections people have. i'm not sure this has been well covered. he dismissed a bunch of the january 6 prosecutors with no real reason other than they don't have trust and confidence in them. in the language of the law that is not a reason. a reason for the civil service would be people aren't doing their jobs, they are incompetent, they are not showing up for work. it requires proof that would satisfy a court. but with the courts -- if the courts help president trump tear down the civil service protections and make civil service employees the equivalent of that will political appointees. then we are looking at a new politicization, something that looks more like a patronage system of the 19th century and the jacksonian area. that's another concern that people in my area worry about that you'll lose the benefits and they are very real, of the civil service and have a more chaotic administration government. host: jim in minnesota, independen

with that, he had. >> invested, it was so corrupt that civil. service that it was so like there was so much political cronyism that political parties would get 3% cut of civil servant salary for giving them a job. >> exactly. >> wow. >> is that incredible? and what teddy roosevelt did in the investigative reporters did, they showed what difference that made that 3% could make the difference of a winter coat or a vacation, or putting aside some money for your kids. and that created a human response to the need for really enforcing the civil rights situation. and by the time teddy left that system that we now have was established, 130 years ago, where your merit was what would get you the job and expertise was required, rather than just being the friend of somebody and loyal to somebody. >> wow. and now, i mean, it's so incredible the cycles of history. you have loyalty, you know, there's they're asking, you know, future possible civil servants or government employees, you know, who won the 2020 election. and if you don't say donald trump, it's unlikely y

a civil service reform where you had to take an exam of merit to come into the into the civil servicese they needed people with expertise. it was a period of time when there was a lot of corruption. it was a period of time when they needed people who knew what they were doing. so finally, that system was beginning to get underway. but it took a long, long time because the other system was so entrenched. it took until president garfield ran as a reform candidate for civil service, and then he was assassinated six months later by a disappointed job seeker. and that created emotions. the hanging of the assassin was emotions. finally, the civil service system finally gets established in the pendleton act in 1883. >> and teddy roosevelt was a civil service commissioner. he's the one who really got, i mean, rolled up his sleeves and really kind of brought this into the modern age. >> absolutely. because when he got in there and he was there for six years, this was a huge commitment of his time. people said, why are you doing this? he said, because he thought a tenet of democracy was to have

civil service has been around for about 150 years. we are -- we provide service to americans and we need you to continue that good work. now we need to make sure that we save social security -- civil service, we are winning in the courts. we're winning in the court of public opinion. and if you send us three republican members of the house we'll win in the house of representatives. [applause] thank you so much. >> thank you so much. i need to shout out all of the other sister and brother unions out here, ok? i know we have ifpet. cwa. cwa? usw? any more? entu. ok. [indiscernible] -- [cheers and applause] we appreciate the brothers and sisters from our sister union. also, i want to remind everyone that because of the tightness of time, we are on our lunch breaks, we need everyone to stay to their two minutes. it is a good problem to have, we have so many representatives who want to speak with you, but at this time we have the cochair of the congressional labor caucus. along with him, maxine dexter from oregon. will you please come. [che

and also, a huge issue, control over civil service employees. and those are really big issues. and i am not sure they have been discussed that much, quite yet. host: we will continue on with our conversation with our guest. if you want to ask about the president's use of executive power, stephen griffin joins us for that conversation. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. an independents, (202) 748-8002. -- and independents, (202) 748-8002. if you want to texas, (202) 748-8003 -- text us, (202) 748-8003. what has the court done as far as giving this type of power to the president? guest: i would characterize it this way. there was an easy balance in the law and an understanding, stemming from two early 20th century decisions. the myers decision in the 1920's, having to do with the post office of all things. and the humphrey's executor decision in 1935, about 90 years ago. the humphrey's executor decision has been mentioned in recent news stories. the supreme court seemed to say the president cannot exercise removal authority and could not control what we

congressman, you're talking about civil service law and lawsuits to try to protect civil servants beingfronts on which the opposition can proceed. what are you seeing as the other potential fronts on which the opposition can advance in very short notice? >> well, in congress, of course, we're going to be fighting them in subcommittees and committees on the floor in the house, in the senate, with filibusters at every turn. but popular protest is going to become very important here, and it's going to look very different from the first trump administration. everybody remembers, you know, a million people gathering for the women's march. and i have no doubt we could get at least that many, if not 5 million. but we also know that donald trump has just pardoned 1500 proud boys, oath keepers, violent insurrectionists, cop assaulters. and so we don't want a huge protest like that to become a magnet for right wing provocateurs and violence. donald trump would love nothing more than to send in the police and to, you know, stage some kind of, you know, declare martial law or something in a situati

. >> civil service law. >> i mean, the heart of. >> civil service. >> that's why we have. >> a civil. >> service. >> as you know. >> and yet. >> they are being very. >> open and. >> explicit about their. >> doing that. i mean. >> to the extent people are given any justification. >> at all, it's that we. >> don't. >> think that you can successfully forward. >> the agenda of president. >> trump. >> which is not an. acceptable justification for firing. >> people who haven't. >> had a chance. >> to even work for donald trump. >> right. >> these are professional. >> independent civil. >> service members. >> republicans, independents, democrats. >> in any. >> event, the vast majority of them. >> have excellent. civil service records, and. >> you. >> have. >> to give. >> them a due process, administrative. >> hearing and. >> tell them. >> specifically what. >> are the charges against them. it's the same thing, by the way. >> with the inspectors. >> general, 18. >> of whom. >> were sacked en. >> masse by by trump. >> when those. >> people have the right. >>

we have a civil service. the civil service exists so people aren't fired for political reasons. and the only justification being given for any of these firings, whether we're talking about prosecutors, fbi agents, people and other agencies, is we feel like you can't get with the president's program. you can't serve him. of course, they haven't been given a chance. so these are apolitical, professional, civil service people. they've not been given the chance. they're just essentially accused of guilt by association for doing their jobs before. and that's an amazing thing. so it's a very dangerous moment for the american people because the professional independent civil service serves us. it's all of the laws and programs that congress has adopted on behalf of the people, like social security, like medicare, like the national parks, like the fbi itself, like prosecution. and suddenly they are trying to bring it directly under the control of the president for political purposes. >> i just said in the opening, i mean, this is an ongoing story. we've the amazing reporters reporting o

service to the nation. we don't want to forget that. operating in federal civilare supporting the functioning of the country. and so, given this long trajectory of ongoing discrimination, that these forms of employment in service to the nation were actually one of the few areas that black people could rely upon to enter the middle class. it's potentially devastating that the loss of that sector. >> and it will it will affect black people disproportionately. aaron imani was just talking about woodrow wilson in 1913. woodrow wilson became the first southerner to win the presidency since before the civil war. and almost immediately after his election, he began a policy of segregation within the federal workforce. we saw back then the impact it had on black american workers and their prosperity. so we've got we've got historical context for what we may see coming. >> absolutely. >> this is why it is so important to know history. ali. i mean, i know imani also knows this history. well, this is not the first time a president has used racist policies to slash black work

fund and then with those with that category funded by the general fund usually will roll into civil service process because they actually are now then when they especially if they're more than two fiscal years they become really baseline so to speak. what are we doing interim in terms of hiring freeze? will hiring freeze actually impact those temporary positions? that's an excellent question. the hiring freeze does impact those positions. >> however, we are having as part of the active conversations that we're having with all the departments that is one of the main areas of consistency of requests that we're seeing across departments for positions that they're requesting to be able to proceed with hiring is for conversion of existing exempt positions into permanent civil service positions and i would say we're looking at those requests pretty favorably. >> yeah, and i think that's a question that i think for us to trying to understand upcoming for this budget in the conversation a few things but both the hiring freeze but also to determine attrition rate i think we have been as 7% and prett

we are really concerned about what we are seeing with how the president is seeking to purge the civil service. we have a range of resources available for civil servants or those concerned about this. i do think there is important work for everyone in federal government service. the president, congress, others, to evaluate the way our government is operating. but we are not seeing that type of evaluation happening. we are seeing a shock and awe approach against the american people and essential services that are really important as well as an effort to seek to hollow out and undermine civil servants across the country in positions from the irs but also any other agencies. that is what we have been focused on at democracy forward. host: we have a question receivedia text message. does democracy forward plan on challenging the trump administration for halting sexual assault training in the military due to trump's executive order when he throughout dei? guest: we have already policy challenging two executive orders that seek to target accessibility but also seek to target people for using and exp

you were talking about what to the extent it does to civil service employees?st: i was discussing blowing through the protections people have. i'm not sure this has been well covered. he dismissed a bunch of the january 6 prosecutors with no real reason other than they don't have trust and confidence in them. in the language of the law that is not a reason. a reason for the civil service would be people aren't doing their jobs, they are incompetent, they are not showing up for work. it requires proof that would satisfy a court. but with the courts -- if the courts help president trump tear down the civil service protections and make civil service employees the equivalent of that will political appointees. then we are looking at a new politicization, something that looks more like a patronage system of the 19th century and the jacksonian area. that's another concern that people in my area worry about that you'll lose the benefits and they are very real, of the civil service and have a more chaotic administration government. host: jim in minnesota, independent li

the apolitical civil service is a triumph of democracy.asically, that no matter which party wins the election, the services, the crucial services that the government provides, all its citizens continue without interruption. whether that's something that doesn't maybe feel as important to you, like getting your passport issued or making sure planes don't crash into one another, or counterterrorism, which you don't know is going on all the time. now, this administration is pushing buyouts on our national security workers buyouts to workers at the cia, the nsa and the office of national intelligence, soon to be headed by tulsi gabbard. but here's the good news voters don't have to wait until the midterms to register their opinions about what donald trump and elon musk are doing to the government and to our national, to our privacy and to our national security. that's because there's a governor's race in virginia, a big, important purple state in 271 days. like all governors in virginia, glenn youngkin is term limited to a single term. and so

you were talking about what to the extent it does to civil service employees?st: i was discussing blowing through the protections people have. i'm not sure this has been well covered. he dismissed a bunch of the january 6 prosecutors with no real reason other than they don't have trust and confidence in them. in the language of the law that is not a reason. a reason for the civil service would be people aren't doing their jobs, they are incompetent, they are not showing up for work. it requires proof that would satisfy a court. but with the courts -- if the courts help president trump tear down the civil service protections and make civil service employees the equivalent of that will political appointees. then we are looking at a new politicization, something that looks more like a patronage system of the 19th century and the jacksonian area. that's another concern that people in my area worry about that you'll lose the benefits and they are very real, of the civil service and have a more chaotic administration government. host: jim in minnesota, independent li

as our civil service rule 115. put on the ballot and row in the by san franciscans prospect a increase representation of individuals with disabilities. and the city workforce. and -- 2016 department of human resources sent it over and created a team called diversity recruit am team who supports our ace program. the vision of that at the time of myself employed to the role at a recruittory support the program was to encourage dhr to support the departments in -- impelementing program in their different departments. i want it star by saying our program is one route to hiring people with disabilities in the city. however, they do have a way to participate in our general hiring process the normal route applicants need to apply for the position through our website. any position they like and during that time they can ask for reasonable accommendations to be successful and taking exam before they are going through the application process the examination and then hired ba that way. our program is another route to how indi

most people have probationary periods and then if they get into the civil service structure after a year they do have a degree of protections. host: those that are in favor of what doge is doing is saying, what is wrong with going through the federal government and seeing where the places are that we can save money, if there is fraud going on, if waste is going on that should be a good thing. guest: i agree that going after waste, fraud, and abuse should be done, but they are not doing it the right way. just a couple of points to make on that front. every major department in the federal government has an office of inspector general. the first thing the trump administration did was follow all of the ig's across the board. windows came in the ig's were already gone. instead of consulting with the people doing these investigations -- and some of these investigations might have been, you know, midway down, they be not even completed -- they fired them and move them out and decided to start from scratch. they brought in a group of people that did not have any kind of investigation experience.

people within the civil service.e need to really look at what elon musk has revealed to us this week. it's really different. start with the salute, and you can argue about that, and people were arguing about it, and they were arguing about it until he doubled down with many nazi chokes on his own personal platform that he uses for his personal gain, and now he is supporting the far-right fascist movement in germany saying you should be feeling so much guilt about what happened in the nazi era, let's forget all of that. this is the most powerful man in washington right now, and we need to look carefully at what that says about this administration and their priorities, and the kind of character that is lacking in leadership in this moment. host: less than 10 minutes left this morning. he is with the interfaith alliance, interfaithalliance.org if you want to check them out online. barbara in oregon, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. yes, i just wanted to say thank you that you are an answer to my prayers bec

people who much interior work evaluations and yet they've been sacked in total violation of the civil serviceaws and the first amend. the reason they're being fired is they won't bow down to elon musk and donald trump. we are looking for a few good republicans to overturn in radical assault on science and health care in america. i want to close with this fought because these people you see here are fighting the viruses that threaten the american people. they're fighting the bird flu, which is starting to be out of control across the country but fascism is a virus too, ok? and the people out here fighting in sub-freezing items are the anti-bodies, we are the antibodies and a rally a day keeps the fastists away. and we are going to spread these rallies not just all over washington, d.c. in front of federal departments and agencies that are being attacked and not just all over the state capitols where people have been night by all over america. we are going to build up match herd immunity to the fascists in america. that's what we're going to do. i'd like to -- let's see, do i get to introduce t

cost overruns on contracts, delays, and policy failures that come not from incompetence from the civil service but from incapacity. same time, civil servants are underpaid relative to private sector counterparts, earning on average 23% less than similarly qualified professionals in the private sector. the salary gap combined with political pressures mounting in the expanding scope of government responsibilities has made it increasingly difficult to attract and maintain top talent. this is particularly concerning given that 70% of federal employees work national security roles, 80 percent serve outside of washington providing vital services to communities across the country. despite these challenges, recent administrative actions threaten to destabilize the civil service further by increasing politicization and eroding principles of professional nonpartisan workforce. these so-called policy/career reclassification and stripping job protections from tens of thousands of career civil servants, allowing them to be dismissed and replaced with political appointees at will, and this risk creating a c

- these are the senior executive service, which are the top civil servants, are people who have generally devoted their lives to public service and are experts in specific areas. and they actually get, their life work is making. - you're saying they're serious people. - these agencies happen and deliver the goods, and they can't do what they feel is necessary. - over the course of american history, there have been several attempts to reform government, starting in 1883 with the pendleton civil service reform act that established the modern civil service. and there was the taft commission, there were two hoover commissions, the grace commission under ronald reagan's presidency, and then of course, the national performance review, in which you participated, and you both contributed under president clinton's presidency. what can elon musk learn, if he wanted to learn from american history, from these previous efforts? - well, what i would hope he would learn is that he's right that periodically government has to be reorganized to look at if it's meeting its goals and to change how it meets i

and get a civil service that served the american people and not whoever was in power. the damage being done, potentially. people think, oh, well, you know, maybe it's just going to be four years. the damage can be done. it can be for generations. >> right? right. i mean, it goes without saying that i think the overwhelming majority of americans want a strong, efficient, independent civil service. we can make improvements. i am not here to tell you that we don't have a bureaucracy, that we don't have waste. we do. we got to work on that. but you don't get rid of thousands and thousands of dedicated public servants and replace them with people who are simply loyal to donald trump. that's not the way democracy is supposed to work. >> just let me just quickly ask you on gaza, when you heard the president, united states, talking about turning the gaza strip, i mean, getting 2 million palestinians out. i mean, is anybody who has read history or the region or been watching for the last year, does this. did did you think this was a joke at first? i mean, can you is this. >> lo

and critics are saying it's it's so dangerous, especially the attempt to really eviscerate the civil service protection, the desire to really get rid of so many of these civil servants who might not be loyal through the buyout, that it is a kind of coup. it's not a violent coup, of course, but what happens in autocratic countries is sometimes the law is eroded through actions like this that simply usurp the lawmaking power of congress. and i do think that's what we're seeing. >> oh my gosh, you said some very strong things, a kind of coup that this is also about undermining the law. is it also about cutting costs? because on the surface, that's what this administration is saying. it's all about. >> that is what they're saying. and of course, they're not going to put it in the terms that i put it. they don't want to admit that it is this assault on democracy. instead, they're they're focusing on these individual actions which have the name. the doge name is, of course, about efficiency. but when you add it all up, it's not just the buyout. it's also the attempt to really cut off federal funds

orban dismantled labor protections for the civil service. trump, musk and russell vought, the newly appointed director of the office of management and budget and architect of the heritage foundation's project 2025. the original regime change blueprint are now using i.t. operations. captured payment systems, secretive engineers, a blizzard of executive orders and viral propaganda to achieve the same thing. she joins me now from warsaw. thank you so much for joining me. and reading through this piece, i am curious about this regime change. is the replacement of a government, usually through force. how did you come to the conclusion that this is what is happening in this country? when donald trump was elected by the public? >> so, to be clear, this kind of change does not usually use force. and the two examples that you cited from. >> my article, which is hungary and venezuela. >> no force was used. >> to change the nature of the government. >> i'm not talking yet about. democratic elections. we haven't seen an assault on. >> on that system sys

and we are the guardians of the civil service. we were the folks who are sworn to protect the constitution when we became federal employees. we are motivated by our service. and go figure. the richest man in the world, who i'm pretty sure is not motivated by, you know, ideas of service. he didn't become the richest man in the world by thinking of others. he's in it for himself and the other billionaires who stand to gain so much through tax cuts. and, uh, you know, the government contracts that we know they're after. >> these probationary employees. i mean, what it really comes down to is they're easiest to fire, but there's also some instances, can you take us through where someone may have gotten a promotion? so technically, their job has changed and their probationary. are you running into that where you actually have folks who have spent many, many years and the u.s. taxpayer has invested a lot of money in their expertise, and all of a sudden they're unexpectedly out. >> totally. yeah. i mean, there's basically two major categ

. >> civil service. >> rules, but. >> the trump administration's. >> view. their legal view is. >> we can ignore all that. >> we can do whatever we want. it doesn't matter about. >> civil service protections. >> we can blow. >> through all of that. and what you're seeing. >> at the fbi is they're. >> trained with all. >> of the imperfections. >> of any agency. >> they are trained. >> on facts and law. >> and the. current law is that there are civil service protections for. >> career fbi agents. >> for career doj officials. >> they're not. >> allowed to be. >> fired without cause. and you know what's not? cause working on. >> a. righteous prosecution is not a cause to. >> fire someone. it is a cause to commend. >> them for. >> what they did. >> frank figliuzzi, what are you hearing this hour? >> what i'm. >> focused on. >> is a couple of things. first, it's clear to me that donald trump lacks the capacity. >> to seriously understand. >> how seriously fbi agents. >> take their oath of office. >> i don't think he grasped that. >> i don't think. >> it's a concep

it went for a member organization of fundamentally bureaucrats, civil service and foreign service running development programs in various countries in the world, in accordance with us express policy. to be a few of those people. very few of those people managing a horde of private contractors. and that's the u. s. 8 of today. so frankly, if marco rubio and dollar from want to change that entirely, i would stay in the street in the blog. because what the did was turn us aide into a fountain of complicity with intelligence services and other n g o is and quite all groups quite as our government groups who's in tap either known to them or unknown to them because they were infiltrated by the c i was to overthrow government. how would you ride samantha power is a bit true. she, of course, was an administrator usa id after being ambassador in the u. n. video country. i don't think samantha power knew the half before i just said. in fact, there are very few people outside the government incentives or who know what the united states is doing, in places like georgia, where it is now trying to over

of politics in our civil service.o we knew we could count on government employees to do the people's business, not the politicians business. we are not just going back to some previous, you know, thing in the 70s, 1970s or the 1950s, we're going all the way back to the 1870s. and how the president of united states wants to govern. so whether he wants to be president mckinley and start annexing, like new new lands overseas, or he wants to go back to an earlier era where everybody's going to be beholden to the president and not beholden to the people. this is not, i think, what the american public signed up for. they wanted change, and the democrats want change. all of us, i think, want to have a government that works for us. it's faster, it's more efficient. but we don't want a government that doesn't work for us and works for billionaires. and the president of united. >> states every four years. i mean, i'm just trying to put my head in the position of this country when we're when trump is not president, right. every

but what flexibility does the president have two fire workers given civil service protections?that musk is doing. >> think they can do a reduction of force. they done the buyouts which a federal judge upheld this last week. trump is also doing these so-called scheduled reform which would limit civil service protections for employees who have a policymaking role. this has allowed under the civil service reform act of 78 provides a lot of flexibility for those high level land jurors who are engaged in supervising lower level employees or involved in any kind of regulatory regulation or developing any kind of guidance. he has flexibility does not mean the democrats will not sue him but he is on firm legal ground if this were to go up to the high court. >> the government might lose the best and brightest year? >> i think of these are the best and brightest the private sector would benefit from them going out into the workforce. alright kim, and you think the president's gone too far in any way here question rick there's a couple of instances i know you follow this or i would argue

one of the main concerns here, you have a civil service that's no longer a civil service there to follow the law, but rather, a civil service which is -- only has partisan who will purse the policies of the leader regardless of whether they're legal or not. another is if you suddenly appoint people to lead different agencies whose priorities are to make life difficult and keep the opposition at bay sbe there in the fbi, be they in the department of justice and so forth. so they're a fact that you can fire anyone who was engaged in investigations with respect to violent defenders impacting the capitol. it's meant to send a signal of fear to anyone who tries to oppose the law. one thing that you can see is that these play books are transnational. one thing you can see is that the use of law, such as tax law, to create fear and put these people at bay. think about today sort of the challenges, the 501 c-3 nonprofit status which may be defending the rule of law or democracy or other public policy issues. think of how tax laws have been weaponized this russia, in india, and other regimes arou

cost overruns on contracts, delays, and policy failures that come not from incompetence from the civil service but from incapacity. same time, civil servants are underpaid relative to private sector counterparts, earning on average 23% less than similarly qualified professionals in the private sector. the salary gap combined with political pressures mounting in the expanding scope of government responsibilities has made it increasingly difficult to attract and maintain top talent. this is particularly concerning given that 70% of federal employees work national security roles, 80 percent serve outside of washington providing vital services to communities across the country. despite these challenges, recent administrative actions threaten to destabilize the civil service further by increasing politicization and eroding principles of professional nonpartisan workforce. these so-called policy/career reclassification and stripping job protections from tens of thousands of career civil servants, allowing them to be dismissed and replaced with political appointees at will, and this risk creating a c

this has to do with the statutes, and also civil service law, and those are the only things at issue courtroom. can you prove that they don't have the right or the ability to put this out? that was not something they could prove in court. >> john: democrats are absolutely losing their minds over all of this. here is a sampling of what we have heard this week. >> i just want to correct what a couple of my colleagues said. they use that word in front of donald trump's name. what they meant to say, [bleep] donald trump and elon musk. >> i don't swear in public very well, but we have to [bleep] trump. [cheers and applause] >> john: screaming f trump and cheering at it at outdoor rallies, is that a good look? does that hit home in the heartland? >> this is so bizarre to me, john, for someone who has covered politics for so long, it is not just the look and behavior, but it is a substance matter, right? everyone understands we are not talking about government being changed in terms of most of the things that americans care about in terms of their federal government, no one is talking about

but a protest nonetheless, that took place and there are against the plans to cut jobs in the civil service, right in the bureaucracy. and this, that's something you would not have seen under the charlotte side. people were protesting against what they called the arbitrary dismissal within the bureaucracy . mohammad whose supports can nominate, i'll show up count on for now. now this is a very important point to indeed because that's what i was just mentioned. that seems to address things to audiences on select easy, heavy bays that help him fight the sub. and when military may, but also his think that is the cd and people a lot of the more of the why the stadium, the secular, the minorities, i'm more importantly to him and his vision and the west. because he's waiting for an international legitimacy listening sanctions of the building a reconstruction find out a single of syria. and so the point is, i'm going to shut it as nothing drains capitalize on the cdn public and the people who and called loved him. the people who are just mentioned that they're happy, they got the 1st time they jus