Connect with us

News

Trump wants to cut the federal workforce. Who they are and what that means

Published

on

Trump wants to cut the federal workforce. Who they are and what that means

President Trump arrives to speak at the House Republican members conference dinner at Trump National Doral Golf Club in Miami on Jan. 27.

Mark Schiefelbein/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Mark Schiefelbein/AP

It has been a confusing several days for federal workers: First came a federal hiring freeze, the announcement of an end to remote work and an executive order reclassifying thousands of civil servant positions. Then came Tuesday’s government-wide email giving nearly all federal employees until Feb. 6 to decide whether to opt into a “deferred resignation program.”

But how well do most Americans understand this group that has been in the news so much — who they are, where they work and what they do? Here are six things to know about this vast pool of workers:

Advertisement

How big is the federal workforce?

About 2.4 million workers are employed by the federal government, excluding uniformed military personnel and U.S. Postal Service employees, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. By contrast, Walmart, the largest private-sector employer in the U.S., has 1.6 million workers.

Where do most federal employees work?

If you guessed Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia, you’d be wrong — and not by a little. Although a sizable concentration of the federal workforce does work in the District of Columbia and the surrounding states (about 459,000 as of March 2024, according to the Office of Personnel Management), 80% of federal civilian employees can be found at military bases and in government offices outside the region: about 181,000 in California, 168,500 in Texas, 115,000 in Florida and 88,000 in Georgia.

That means the effects of cuts in the federal workforce won’t be felt in just the D.C. area but will be “scattered across the country,” according to Don Moynihan, a professor at the Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan.

Fifty-four percent of federal workers are 100% on-site. That’s according to May 2024 data from the Office of Management and Budget cited by the Federal News Network that was originally posted on a since-removed White House page. The other 46% are eligible for telework, most of which are on hybrid schedules. Only 10% of them are working entirely remotely.

Advertisement

Also, one-third of nonuniformed federal workers are military veterans, according to Max Stier, president and CEO of the Partnership for Public Service, which describes itself as a nonpartisan nonprofit dedicated to a better government and stronger democracy.

“Most people don’t understand that lots of people in the military go into civil service because they want to continue to serve,” he says.

Just a few agencies and departments employ most of the workers. And their numbers haven’t been growing much

“The vast majority of the [federal] civilian nonuniform employees are either in Veterans Affairs, Homeland Security or the Department of Defense,” Moynihan says.

Despite what may be conventional wisdom, the relative size of the federal workforce hasn’t skyrocketed in recent years, according to a Pew Research Center report released this month.

Advertisement

“While the number of federal workers has grown over time, their share of the civilian workforce has generally held steady in recent years,” the report says.

That’s “despite the fact that our government is doing lots more stuff,” Stier adds.

Salaries of federal workers take up just a fraction of the government’s budget

Moynihan says the government spends “about $350 billion on federal employees every year, out of a $6.5 trillion budget.”

That represents “a tiny sliver of total government spending — just around 5% to 6%,” according to Josh Bivens, chief economist at the Economic Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank.

There are concerns that cuts could affect vital services that impact average Americans

It depends on how many federal employees leave and which agencies and positions see the most departures.

Advertisement

But regardless, “programs that provide retirement, health and income support — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid — need to be administered,” Bivens says.

“Claims have to be filed and examined, and problems need [to be] addressed,” he says. “Payments to farmers need [to be] processed and administered,” and “key public goods like pandemic monitoring and response” need to take place.

More esoteric government responsibilities, such as economic data collection and analysis, are also vital, he adds.

Stier offers up a few examples of what could go wrong. The administration says it wants a 10% cut, he says, but “what happens if that is 50% of the food safety inspectors or 50% of the air traffic controllers or 50% at the FBI?”

“You’re talking about a fairly arbitrary reduction. … It’s entirely unpredictable about who actually walks away and who decides to stay,” he says.

Advertisement

Cuts could have other downsides

Buyouts and incentives aimed at shrinking the number of federal employees aren’t new. They were tried in the mid-1990s, during Bill Clinton’s presidency. But the results were mixed at best, according to a 1997 report by what’s now called the Government Accountability Office.

“[A]gencies often granted buyouts across the board rather than prioritizing them to achieve specific organizational objectives,” the GAO concluded.

“This contributed to a variety of adverse operational impacts. For example, 15 agencies said that they had experienced a loss of corporate memory and expertise, and 11 agencies said that there were work backlogs because key personnel had separated,” the report said.

As a result, Moynihan says, those agencies lost vital skills and ended up hiring more outside consultants — some of the very same federal workers who had quit — at a higher cost to taxpayers, “because people who had the most capabilities and most value on the private sector job market were the first to leave.” 

“Rational employees who think, ‘You know, I can make more in the private sector than I’m making in government, and it’s not worth the hassle of continuing to stay in this new environment,’” he says.

Advertisement

News

Waymo called the cops on teen riders, raising privacy concerns

Published

on

Waymo called the cops on teen riders, raising privacy concerns

A Waymo robotaxi drives in San Francisco’s North Beach neighborhood this week.

Heather Diehl/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Heather Diehl/Getty Images

Police in San Mateo, Calif., posted Monday on social media that they had apprehended a pair of teenagers from a Waymo driverless robotaxi after the company alerted authorities to suspected criminal activity. It’s the latest incident involving video surveillance of passengers and others by autonomous vehicles — raising questions about the limits of privacy in such vehicles.

The Facebook post by the San Mateo County Police said: “Parents do you know where your teens are? @waymo does!”

The 15-year-olds were allegedly drinking alcohol and shooting toy guns from the car, according to the police. They said Waymo’s systems detected behavior that then triggered a safety response, after which the company disabled the vehicle and contacted police.

Advertisement

Waymo’s cars, equipped with an array of cameras, microphones and other sensors to monitor passengers and other nearby vehicles, are becoming more common in cities across the United States. Experts say the detention of the two teens in San Mateo highlights a potential — but not inevitable — trade-off between privacy and convenience. It also questions the extent to which companies similar to Waymo are required to hand over private data, including audio and video of passengers, in situations where a crime is suspected.

NPR reached out to Waymo, which is owned by Alphabet, the parent company of Google, for comment on the details of the San Mateo incident and how the company responded, but did not hear back. But on its website, the company says that as many as 29 cameras in its autonomous cars provide an all-around view and “are designed with high dynamic range and thermal stability, to see in both daylight and low-light conditions, and tackle more complex environments.”

“There already exist laws that govern duty to report or even duty to protect” for carriers such as Waymo, according to Alessandro Acquisti, a professor of information technology at the MIT Sloan School of Management. “The privacy problems arise when and if driverless carrier companies used such laws or ethical obligations as a pretext for blanket, indiscriminate accumulation of identifiable data for unspecified future purposes.”

That includes not just monitoring people inside the cars, but outside too. Take, for example, a hit-and-run investigation last year in Los Angeles. Media reported that the police inquiry was aided by video captured by a Waymo taxi that had a clear view of the crime. Critics suggested at the time that authorities were using the company’s vehicles as a mobile surveillance platform. And during 2025 protests in Los Angeles against Immigration and Customs Enforcement crackdowns, demonstrators vandalized Waymos, apparently angry that video recorded by the vehicles could be used by police, although there is no evidence that happened.

Continue Reading

News

Trump fires last members of election commission, inciting fears of midterm ‘chaos’

Published

on

Trump fires last members of election commission, inciting fears of midterm ‘chaos’

Donald Trump has terminated the remaining members of the independent, federal commission that assists election administration officials nationwide just a few months before the midterm elections, multiple outlets reported Thursday.

The remaining three commissioners of the four-member bipartisan commission ⁠were forced out on Thursday in different ways. The one Republican appointee resigned and the other ⁠two, Democratic appointees were notified of their terminations via email from ​the White House presidential personnel office.

“On ‌behalf of President ‌Donald J Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position ‌as Commissioner of the Election Assistance Commission is terminated, effective immediately. Thank you for your service,” the email, seen by Reuters, said.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Election Assistance Commission serves as a “national clearinghouse of information on election ‌administration”, accredits testing laboratories and certifies voting systems, and maintains the national mail-voter registration form developed by the National ​Voter Registration Act of 1993, according to the commission’s website. The terminations follow Trump and top administration officials’ advocacy to change vote-by-mail requirements and investigations into the 2020 election outcome, which Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

Advertisement

“It is ⁠irresponsible and dangerous that this Administration remains dead set on ​causing chaos for ​our election officials across this ​country,” Arizona secretary of state Adrian Fontes said in a ​Thursday statement. “This ‌move undermines the integrity ​of nonpartisan ​election administration.”

The 2002 law that established the commission, the Help America Vote Act, states the president can appoint replacements to the commission.

It is unclear how Trump will move ahead with the commission.

Reuters contributed reporting

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Published

on

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Former U.S. Olympian David Hearn (left) walks with his attorney Norman Eisen to speak to reporters and protesters gathered after his arraignment at the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C. on Thursday.

Finn Gomez/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Finn Gomez/Getty Images

Former U.S. Olympic canoeist David Hearn pleaded not guilty to damaging the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in D.C. Superior Court Thursday morning.

Federal prosecutors charged Hearn with a single count of destruction of property causing more than $1,000 in damage to the pool.

Hearn has previously claimed, which his attorneys repeated during a short press conference outside the court, that he simply touched the water in the pool out of curiosity.

Advertisement

The Trump administration had just completed a $14 million renovation of the pool.

But shortly after the work finished, peeling paint and algae gathered in the water. The remodel has been largely criticized as a massive failure and waste of taxpayer dollars.

Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean released Hearn on his own recognizance. His next hearing is scheduled for Aug. 5.

Norm Eisen, one of Hearn’s attorneys, spoke to reporters outside of court following the hearing. He said the administration is using Hearn as a “scapegoat … for their own failures.”

“It is not a crime to touch the reflecting pool, to touch water in the United States of America,” he said.

Advertisement

Prosecutors say there is a host of evidence against Hearn.

This is a developing story.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending