H.R.697 - Enabling Necessary Discipline with the Defense of Executives’ Endeavors to Properly Staff Their Agencies with Trustworthy Employees Act; End the Deep State Act (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.697, also known as the "End the Deep State Act," aims to establish a new category of federal employees called "Schedule Policy/Career" within the excepted service. These positions would be for those in confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating roles not normally subject to change during presidential transitions.
The bill seeks to increase accountability of federal employees to the President and his appointees. It also streamlines the process for agencies to place positions into this new category.
The bill also aims to rescind changes made by a previous rule that the bill's authors believe impede the implementation of Executive Order 13957, and revokes Executive Order 14003, which protected the federal workforce.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of this bill would be to grant the President greater control over the federal bureaucracy by making it easier to hire and fire employees in policy-related positions. This could lead to a more politically aligned civil service.
It could also result in decreased job security for some federal employees, potentially impacting their ability to provide impartial advice and expertise. The bill could also lead to legal challenges regarding the scope of presidential authority over the civil service.
Potential Benefits
- Increased accountability of federal employees to the President.
- Streamlined process for agencies to staff policy-related positions with individuals aligned with the administration's goals.
- Potential for more efficient implementation of the President's agenda.
- Could reduce bureaucratic resistance to policy changes.
- May lead to a more responsive government.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for politicization of the civil service, undermining its independence and expertise.
- Decreased job security for federal employees, potentially leading to a chilling effect on dissent and independent analysis.
- Risk of abuse of power by the President, leading to arbitrary firings and appointments based on political loyalty rather than merit.
- Could lead to instability and disruption in government operations due to frequent personnel changes.
- May undermine the principle of a non-partisan civil service, which is essential for good governance.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality is debatable. While Article II vests executive power in the President, including the power to appoint officers, Congress has the power to regulate the civil service. The extent to which Congress can limit the President's control over the executive branch is a matter of ongoing debate.
Some may argue that the bill infringes upon the President's executive authority by unduly restricting his ability to staff the government with individuals who support his policies. Others may argue that the bill is a legitimate exercise of Congress's power to regulate the civil service and ensure its independence and non-partisanship.
The bill's requirement that employees faithfully implement administration policies could also raise First Amendment concerns if it is interpreted to require employees to suppress their own views or engage in political advocacy.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).