They say a new broom sweeps in a new way. In the case of the initiatives implemented from the first days of the reign of the newly elected President of the USA, this expression should be supplemented: the goal is aggressive and self-assertive in a new way. The changes that President Trump introduced in the US federal government, caused a shock among civil servants. In a short period of time, his team has laid off hundreds of workers, and this is just the beginning. Trump quickly followed through on his campaign promises to cut red tape and remove those he deemed disloyal to his goals.
During the first days of his presidency, radical changes took place in several departments: more than 160 people were forced to leave their jobs in the National Security Council, dozens of senior lawyers were transferred to other positions in the Ministry of Justice, and the heads of the US Coast Guard and TSA were dismissed. Some government departments dealing with diversity issues have closed, leaving workers out of work. In addition, a series of executive orders reversed the policies of the previous administration, further fueling uncertainty among civil servants.
The new head of the United States plans to release more than 1,000 more officials appointed by Joe Biden. To do this, he issued a decree simplifying the procedure for dismissing civil servants by changing their status. The move angered unions, which filed lawsuits in an attempt to protect workers.
Former employees of the National Security Council reported that they felt strong pressure from the new administration, which, in their opinion, considered them part of the so-called «deep state.» The new order creates an additional category of workers who can be fired without particular reason, putting the jobs of hundreds of thousands of people at risk.
The actions of the Trump administration have shocked American society and the establishment. In less than a week in office, Trump has begun not only to reorganize the government, but also to dismantle the bureaucracy that he says has become an obstacle to reform. However, such radical steps divided the society — from support to deep indignation.
There is an atmosphere of confusion and fear among government officials. Thousands of employees, who previously felt protected by the system, are now forced to think about their future. As the executive director of the union of federal employees Steve Lenkart noted, in the corridors of state institutions there was «stunned silence«. People are afraid not only of losing their jobs, but also of confidence in the stability of their state.
Trade unions are sounding the alarm, trying in the courts to stop the new decrees, which overturn decades of employment rules. At stake are not only the jobs of hundreds of thousands of people, but also the very principle of independence of the civil service.
However, there is a wave of support among Trump voters. In particular, new allies from the technology and financial sectors, including California millionaires and cryptocurrency enthusiasts, gathered in Washington to celebrate his return to power. The radical reforms of the Teflon Don are perceived by them as a long-awaited purge, a way to get rid of bureaucrats, whom they consider the «deep state». Trump supporters they see in his actions, the implementation of campaign promises and the desire to finally return control of the government to the hands of «real Americans».
At the same time, the opposition does not hide indignation, accusing Trump of trying to create an authoritarian system where loyalty to the leader becomes more important than competence. They warn that such steps will not only weaken the state apparatus, but also undermine democratic values.
The motivation to “drain the Washington swamp”
Trump’s actions are motivated by his campaign promises to dismantle the old bureaucratic system and create a more controlled, efficient government. During the campaign, he repeatedly emphasized the need to «drain the Washington swamp”, accusing many officials of being part of the “deep state” – an invisible network of bureaucrats who, he says, are sabotaging reforms.
Trump justifies his actions by the need to get rid of officials who do not share his vision and are an obstacle to the implementation of his policy of increasing economic growth, reducing regulatory pressure and ensuring «real» national security. According to him, the state machine has become too cumbersome and dependent on the old political elites, which makes it ineffective and distant from the needs of ordinary Americans.
Release thousands of civil servants, the reorganization of departments and the elimination of offices that focused on issues of diversity or climate change, Trump explains the desire to rid the state of unnecessary expenses and focus on «real» priorities. In his speeches, he emphasizes that the government should be «compact, mobile and maximally loyal to the chosen course”.
The obvious desire of the first person of the state to strengthen the control of his administration over the state apparatus. By issuing decrees reclassifying positions, he creates new mechanisms for firing disloyal employees. This gives him more leverage and allows him to avoid resistance from career officials, who often work independently of political changes.
His actions can also be seen as part of a broader effort to reform the government by giving more power to the executive branch. This is justified by the need to respond more quickly to the challenges of the time, but at the same time it raises concerns about the concentration of power in the hands of the president.
Similar historical precedents for reducing the state apparatus — Jackson’s «spoiler» system, Roosevelt’s New Deal, Nixon’s reforms after «Watergate»
Reforms aimed at changing the state apparatus have a long history in the United States and other countries. In the United States, such attempts often arose during major political or social upheavals, when presidents sought to consolidate power or reshape the system to their liking. The current actions of Donald Trump can be considered precisely in this context.
Thus, Andrew Jackson (1829–1837), like Trump, considered himself the «voice of the people» and criticized the elitist bureaucracy. He introduced a system of «spoils» (spoils system), when political positions were massively transferred to his supporters. This allowed him to strengthen his control over the state apparatus, but at the same time made the government less professional and prone to corruption.
During the Great Depression and World War II, Franklin Roosevelt (1933–1945) expanded the government apparatus through the New Deal, creating numerous new agencies. Although this was done for economic recovery, opponents accused it of concentrating power and undermining the balance of the branches of government.
Like Trump, Ronald Reagan (1981–1989) advocated shrinking government, cutting red tape, and cutting taxes. His administration has eliminated or reduced funding for a number of federal programs and regulatory agencies, sparking debate about the social and economic consequences.
After the Watergate scandal with Richard Nixon in the 1970s, society demanded greater transparency and independence of civil servants. New restrictions on presidential influence over the bureaucracy were introduced, including rules on appointments and dismissals.
Reforms of Thatcher, Xiaoping and Putin regarding «overblown bureaucracy» and centralization of power
At one time, Margaret Thatcher, like Trump, sought to reduce the influence of the state and eliminate the «bloated bureaucracy.» She reduced government spending, closed numerous departments and privatized state enterprises, which caused significant social and economic changes.
During his quarter-century rule, Putin has concentrated control over the Russian state apparatus through the centralization of power. He fired and replaced officials, increasing his influence at all levels of government. This ensured the stability of his power, but reduced the independence of institutions.
In the 1980s, Deng Xiaoping reorganized the Celestial State system by reducing bureaucracy and introducing market reforms. However, these changes were carried out due to the increased control of the Communist Party, which made it impossible for the independence of state structures.
Trump’s actions so far resemble the efforts of previous leaders to reform the system, but their speed and aggressiveness appear to be more aimed at strengthening personal control than at long-term structural reforms.
…Next time, we will look at how American unions are resisting the Trump administration’s orders that they believe threaten the independence of the civil service, what risks these steps pose to the functioning of the state apparatus, and whether legal countermeasures or restrictions on such actions are possible in the future.
Tetyana Viktorova
