Reorganizing Government Act of 2025

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/1295
Last Updated: June 10, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1]

ID: C001108

Follow the money

The bill

Reorganizing Government Act of 2025

HR. 1295, 119th Congress — read as touching Labor Unions.

The sponsor

Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$129,800 raised

21 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

64% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 112-114 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 397.

January 26, 2026

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another bill from the esteemed members of Congress, because what this country really needs is more bureaucratic reorganization. Let's get down to business and dissect this mess.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Reorganizing Government Act of 2025 (HR 1295) claims to aim for "efficient executive reorganization" by amending chapter 9 of title 5, United States Code. In reality, it's a thinly veiled attempt to grant the President more authority to reshape the executive branch without Congressional oversight. The bill's sponsors want you to believe this will lead to cost savings and improved efficiency. Please.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill makes several changes to existing law, including:

* Expanding the President's reorganization authority to include eliminating "unnecessary" operations and reducing the number of Federal employees (because who needs those pesky bureaucrats, right?). * Redefining what constitutes an "executive department" to include more agencies and offices. * Granting the President more flexibility in consolidating or abolishing executive departments.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects will be impacted:

* Federal employees, who might find themselves on the chopping block. * Agencies and departments that could be consolidated or eliminated. * Lobbyists and special interest groups, who will likely have a field day trying to influence the reorganization process. * Taxpayers, who will foot the bill for this bureaucratic shell game.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a recipe for disaster. By giving the President more authority to reorganize the executive branch without adequate oversight, we can expect:

* A further concentration of power in the hands of the Executive. * Increased politicization of the bureaucracy. * Potential job losses and disruption of essential government services. * More opportunities for cronyism and corruption.

In short, this bill is a classic case of "reorganizing the deck chairs on the Titanic." It's a distraction from the real issues facing our country, and it will only serve to further entrench the interests of those who benefit from the status quo. Bravo, Congress. You've done it again.

Related Topics

Executive Branch OversightFederal Budget & AppropriationsGovernment Operations & Accountability
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$129,800
18 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$2,000
Committees
$0
Individuals
$127,800

No PAC contributions found

1
SHAMAN BOTANICALS
1 transaction
$2,000

No committee contributions found

1
SINGER, PAUL
3 transactions
$19,800
2
HANCOCK, SAM
2 transactions
$13,200
3
SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE
1 transaction
$6,600
4
SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN
1 transaction
$6,600
5
WALSH, KENNETH
1 transaction
$6,600
6
LAGANAS, ELIZA
1 transaction
$6,600
7
SCHWAB, CHARLES
1 transaction
$6,600
8
HILLERSON, ARLENE
1 transaction
$6,600
9
SMITH, BRAD
1 transaction
$6,600
10
SALLAH, KATHLEEN
1 transaction
$6,600
11
WALKER, RONALD
1 transaction
$6,600
12
FISHER, CYNTHIA
1 transaction
$6,600
13
TAYLOR, MARGARETTA J MISS
1 transaction
$6,600
14
WILSON, MICHAEL
1 transaction
$6,000
15
TART, BETTY L MS.
1 transaction
$5,600
16
TALCOVE, HAYWOOD
1 transaction
$5,600
17
FRASIER, GRANT
1 transaction
$5,000

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Donalds, Byron [R-FL-19]

ID: D000032

Top Contributors

10

1
SHANNON GREEN COLLECTION
OrganizationNAPLES, FL
$500
Dec 28, 2023
2
NAPLES SMART, LLC
OrganizationNAPLES, FL
$250
Jun 4, 2024
3
COX, JOE B
NELSON MULLINSATTORNEY
IndividualNAPLES, FL
$6,600
Dec 30, 2023
4
STALLINGS, KYLE
DESERT ROYALTY COMPANYFOUNDER/CEO
IndividualMIDLAND, TX
$6,600
Mar 9, 2023
5
ZALIK, DAVID
GOLDMAN SACHSEXECUTIVE
IndividualMARIETTA, GA
$6,600
Jan 3, 2024
6
ZALIK, HELEN
HOMEMAKERHOMEMAKER
IndividualATLANTA, GA
$6,600
Jan 6, 2024
7
BAUM, DAVID
ENTREPRENEURENTREPRENEUR
IndividualSANIBEL, FL
$6,600
Feb 13, 2024
8
WALDRIP, EMORY
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualNAPLES, FL
$6,600
May 20, 2023
9
MANDELBLATT, DANIELLE
DMM PROPRIETA MANAGEMENTMANAGER
IndividualASPEN, CO
$6,600
Jun 7, 2024
10
MANDELBLATT, ERIC
SOROBAN CAPITAL PARTNERS LPMANAGING PARTNER
IndividualASPEN, CO
$6,600
Jun 7, 2024

Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]

ID: B001302

Top Contributors

10

1
TAYLOR, MARGARETTA J
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$3,300
Dec 15, 2023
2
TAYLOR, MARGARETTA J
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$3,300
Dec 15, 2023
3
MCCLEVE, LONNIE
SELF EMPLOYEDDEVELOPER
IndividualQUEEN CREEK, AZ
$3,300
Oct 16, 2023
4
BENSON, LEE
LEE BENSONCEO
IndividualMESA, AZ
$3,300
Oct 18, 2023
5
FAUST, ANNE R
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualNEWTOWN SQUARE, PA
$3,300
Oct 6, 2023
6
BENSON, LEE
LEE BENSONCEO
IndividualMESA, AZ
$3,300
Oct 18, 2023
7
BROPHY, DANIEL
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualJACKSON, WY
$3,300
Dec 21, 2023
8
LONDEN, PRISCILLA
LONDEN INSURANCE GROUPEXECUTIVE
IndividualPHOENIX, AZ
$3,300
Mar 7, 2023
9
ALLEN, GWYNDA S
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualSUN LAKES, AZ
$3,300
Mar 22, 2023
10
COOLEY, WILLIAM
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualWEST PALM BEACH, FL
$3,300
Mar 7, 2023

Rep. Greene, Marjorie Taylor [R-GA-14]

ID: G000596

Top Contributors

10

1
PREWETT SERVICES LLC
OrganizationSOUTHAVEN, MS
$5,000
Jun 14, 2023
2
PREWETT SERVICES LLC
OrganizationSOUTHAVEN, MS
$1,700
Jun 14, 2023
3
THE WETZEL FAMILY TRUST
OrganizationLAS VEGAS, NV
$250
Jun 28, 2024
4
LUKE, DON MR
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualPHOENIX, AZ
$11,600
Mar 13, 2023
5
RADGOWSKI, STEVEN
IndividualNORTHPORT, NY
$7,300
Dec 31, 2023
6
HAHN, SAMUEL
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualFAIRVIEW HEIGHTS, IL
$6,600
Aug 30, 2024
7
ELLIOTT, BEVERLY B MS
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualMOUNT JULIET, TN
$6,600
Mar 16, 2023
8
MCMANUS, DEBORAH
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualLIVERMORE, CA
$6,600
Mar 18, 2023
9
FORSYTHE, GERALD R
INDECK ENERGY SERVICESCEO
IndividualNAPLES, FL
$6,600
May 31, 2023
10
KNIGHT, JZ
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualYELM, WA
$6,600
May 24, 2023

Rep. Jack, Brian [R-GA-3]

ID: J000311

Top Contributors

10

1
CHAPLAIN PAUL VOORHEES MINIST IN 04/13
OrganizationCOLUMBUS, GA
$500
May 10, 2024
2
JANICE W RILEY TRUST
OrganizationWOODSTOCK, GA
$300
Apr 3, 2024
3
HINTON, JONATHAN W
RAVENVOLTFOUNDER
IndividualBALL GROUND, GA
$14,900
Apr 22, 2024
4
MACRICOSTAS, GEORGE
FLAT WILLOW FARMOWNER
IndividualINCLINE VILLAGE, NV
$13,200
Jun 17, 2024
5
WINTERSTEEN, JAMES M
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualMILL VALLEY, CA
$13,200
Jun 18, 2024
6
GARCIA, CHRIS
SELF EMPLOYEDBUSINESSMAN
IndividualCAROLINA BEACH, NC
$9,900
Mar 28, 2024
7
GARCIA, KAT
SELF EMPLOYEDBUSINESSWOMAN
IndividualCAROLINA BEACH, NC
$9,900
Mar 28, 2024
8
KUMAR, SHALLI
KUMAR FAMILY LTDCEO
IndividualBETTENDORF, ID
$9,900
May 15, 2024
9
FISHER, ARTHUR
FISHER REALTYREAL ESTATE BROKER
IndividualBREVARD, NC
$6,870
Mar 27, 2024
10
RICKETTS, TODD
SELFINVESTMENT MANAGER
IndividualWILMETTE, IL
$6,870
Apr 22, 2024

Rep. Gill, Brandon [R-TX-26]

ID: G000603

Top Contributors

10

1
BOERNE STAGE AIRFIELD
OrganizationBOERNE, TX
$2,500
Mar 12, 2024
2
HOLMES LAW
OrganizationDALLAS, TX
$500
Feb 14, 2024
3
WILLIAMS, JOHN
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualWESLEY CHAPEL, FL
$6,818
Feb 6, 2024
4
AZRIELI, MATTHEW
BASTE RECORDSEXECUTIVE
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$6,818
Nov 20, 2023
5
BENNETT, MATT
CHRISTIAN UNIONMINISTER
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$6,818
Nov 20, 2023
6
GILL, BEVERLY
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualCLYDE, TX
$6,818
Nov 20, 2023
7
GILL, JUDITH
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualCLYDE, TX
$6,818
Nov 20, 2023
8
GILL, RUSSELL
DELTA AIR LINESPILOT AND RANCHER
IndividualCLYDE, TX
$6,818
Nov 20, 2023
9
GILL, JUDITH
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualCLYDE, TX
$6,818
Nov 20, 2023
10
SCHOOLEY, BRUCE
NOBLE PRODUCTIONS INCSELF-EMPLOYED
IndividualALAMO, CA
$6,818
Nov 20, 2023

Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6]

ID: G000576

Top Contributors

10

1
HO CHUNK NATION
OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI
$3,300
Oct 28, 2024
2
GENTINE, LOUIS P. II
SARGENTOEXECUTIVE
IndividualELKHART LAKE, WI
$13,200
Mar 15, 2024
3
SCHLIFSKE, JOHN E.
NORTHWESTERN MUTUALGOVERNMENT RELATIONS
IndividualELM GROVE, WI
$6,600
Mar 22, 2024
4
SCHLIFSKE, KIM C.
HOMEMAKERHOMEMAKER
IndividualELM GROVE, WI
$6,600
Mar 22, 2024
5
LEVY, EDWARD
EDWARD C LEVY COCHAIRMAN
IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI
$6,600
Apr 10, 2024
6
KRESS, DONALD F.
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualGREEN BAY, WI
$5,000
Nov 22, 2023
7
WELLS, CECELIA A.
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualMEQUON, WI
$5,000
Jun 30, 2023
8
WELLS, CECELIA
IndividualMEQUON, WI
$5,000
Jun 30, 2023
9
AYLWARD, RICHARD J. MR.
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualNEENAH, WI
$4,000
Mar 15, 2024
10
KRESS, DONALD F.
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualGREEN BAY, WI
$3,300
Dec 31, 2023

Rep. Fallon, Pat [R-TX-4]

ID: F000246

Top Contributors

10

1
DODD CG LLC
OrganizationDALLAS, TX
$3,000
Aug 6, 2024
2
NORTH TEXAS RHEUMATOLOGY PA
OrganizationDALLAS, TX
$1,700
Oct 7, 2023
3
PARTEE, SUE
PARTEE ENTERPRISESOIL AND GAS PRODUCTION
IndividualBIG SPRING, TX
$20,757
Oct 10, 2024
4
PARTEE, SUE
IndividualBIG SPRING, TX
$20,757
Dec 3, 2024
5
PENZ, WILLIAM
RODMAN EXCAVATIONVP
IndividualFRISCO, TX
$10,000
Apr 24, 2024
6
GLENDENNING, REX
REX REAL ESTATEBROKER/OWNER
IndividualCELINA, TX
$5,000
Apr 25, 2024
7
PHILLIPS, BRADFORD
LIBERTY BANKERSCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & CHAIRMAN OF
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$5,000
Apr 26, 2024
8
SNYDER, RICK
HEARTPLACECARDIOLOGIST
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$3,425
Nov 5, 2024
9
ADAMS, CAROL
SELFOIL, GAS & AGRICULTURE
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$3,300
Sep 30, 2023
10
GOTT, JANET
IndividualSHERMAN, TX
$3,300
Aug 16, 2023

Rep. Crane, Elijah [R-AZ-2]

ID: C001132

Top Contributors

10

1
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$3,300
Mar 31, 2024
2
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$3,300
Sep 16, 2024
3
STALLINGS, KYLE MR.
IndividualMIDLAND, TX
$10,000
Oct 14, 2024
4
HILL, VERNON
IndividualMOORESTOWN, NJ
$7,318
Jul 11, 2024
5
STALLINGS, KYLE MR.
IndividualMIDLAND, TX
$6,600
Mar 1, 2023
6
MIRELES, OMAR
HSL PROPERTIESREAL ESTATE DEVELOPER
IndividualTUCSON, AZ
$6,600
Mar 29, 2023
7
ADAMS, MICHAEL A.
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualMCLEAN, VA
$6,600
Jun 30, 2024
8
ADAMS, MICHAEL A.
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualMCLEAN, VA
$6,600
Jun 30, 2024
9
HINMAN, ROY H. MR. II
ISLAND DOCTORSFOUNDER/CEO
IndividualST. AUGUSTINE, FL
$6,600
Apr 4, 2023
10
KEMMERER, KAREN
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualJACKSON, WY
$6,600
Apr 6, 2023

Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13]

ID: L000596

Top Contributors

0

No contribution data available

Rep. Burlison, Eric [R-MO-7]

ID: B001316

Top Contributors

10

1
OZARK SHOOT-DON'T SHOOT SOLUTIONS LLC
OrganizationHIGHLANDVILLE, MO
$250
Oct 11, 2024
2
CARNES, CAROL
SELF EMPLOYEDREAL ESTATE AGENT
IndividualSPRINGFIELD, MO
$3,300
Oct 28, 2024
3
WATTS, BARRY
SAVINGYOUTAXES.COMFINANCIAL ADVISOR
IndividualROGERSVILLE, MO
$3,300
Nov 4, 2024
4
JOHN, STACK
ISAGENIXINDEPENDENT BUSINESS OWNER
IndividualSPRINGFIELD, MO
$3,300
Nov 20, 2023
5
BRAUER, BEAU
HUNTER ENGINEERINGPRESIDENT
IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO
$3,300
Jan 4, 2024
6
BRAUER, BEAU
HUNTER ENGINEERINGPRESIDENT
IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO
$3,300
Jan 4, 2024
7
BRAUER, SUZY
IndividualBRIDGETON, MO
$3,300
Jan 4, 2024
8
BRAUER, SUZY
IndividualBRIDGETON, MO
$3,300
Jan 4, 2024
9
KAMAT, SONA
WEST COUNTY RHEUMATOLOGYRHEUMATOLOGIST
IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO
$3,300
Jan 12, 2024
10
WHIRE, DEBBIEJO
KANAKUKCAMPING
IndividualBRANSON, MO
$3,300
Feb 15, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 73 nodes and 36 connections (53 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $179,518

Top Donors - Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1]

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

1 Org17 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 harmed.

  • Labor Unionsconfidence 0.90

    Section 901(a)(7) explicitly aims to reduce the number of Federal employees, which could directly harm labor unions by reducing their membership and bargaining power.

  • Section 905(a)(7) creates a provision that could limit government contracts or investments, potentially affecting private equity and hedge funds by creating a net increase in the number of Federal workers or a net increase in expenditures.

  • Commercial Banksconfidence 0.60

    The overall reduction in government operations and potential decrease in federal employees (Section 901(a)(7)) might reduce demand for banking services from the government sector.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HARMS

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.

Introduction

Moderate64.0%
Pages: 112-114

— 79 — Central Personnel Agencies: Managing the Bureaucracy What is needed at the beginning is a freeze on all top career-position hiring to prevent “burrowing-in” by outgoing political appointees. Moreover, four fac- tors determine the order in which employees are protected during layoffs: tenure, veterans’ preference, seniority, and performance in that order of importance. Despite several attempts in the House of Representatives during the Trump years to enact legislation that would modestly increase the weight given to performance over time-of-service, the fierce opposition by federal managers associations and unions representing long-serving but not necessarily well-performing constituents explains why the bills failed to advance. A determined President should insist that performance be first and be wary of costly types of reductions-in-force. Impenetrable Bureaucracy. The GAO has identified almost a hundred actions that the executive branch or Congress could take to improve efficiency and effec- tiveness across 37 areas that span a broad range of government missions and functions. It identified 33 actions to address mission fragmentation, overlap, and duplication in the 12 areas of defense, economic development, health, homeland security, and information technology. It also identified 59 other opportunities for executive agencies or Congress to reduce the cost of government operations or enhance revenue collection across 25 areas of government.20 A logical place to begin would be to identify and eliminate functions and pro- grams that are duplicated across Cabinet departments or spread across multiple agencies. Congress hoped to help this effort by passing the Government Perfor- mance and Results Act of 1993,21 which required all federal agencies to define their missions, establish goals and objectives, and measure and report their per- formance to Congress. Three decades of endless time-consuming reports later, the government continues to grow but with more paper and little change either in performance or in the number of levels between government and the people. The Brookings Institution’s Paul Light emphasizes the importance of the increasing number of levels between the top heads of departments and the people at the bottom who receive the products of government decision-making. He esti- mates that there are perhaps 50 or more levels of impenetrable bureaucracy and no way other than imperfect performance appraisals to communicate between them.22 The Trump Administration proposed some possible consolidations, but these were not received favorably in Congress, whose approval is necessary for most such proposals. The best solution is to cut functions and budgets and devolve respon- sibilities. That is a challenge primarily for Presidents, Congress, and the entire government, but the OPM still needs to lead the way governmentwide in managing personnel properly even in any future smaller government. Creating a Responsible Career Management Service. The people elect a President who is charged by Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution23 with seeing that the laws are “faithfully executed” with his political appointees democratically linked to that legitimizing responsibility. An autonomous bureaucracy has neither

Introduction

Moderate64.0%
Pages: 112-114

— 79 — Central Personnel Agencies: Managing the Bureaucracy What is needed at the beginning is a freeze on all top career-position hiring to prevent “burrowing-in” by outgoing political appointees. Moreover, four fac- tors determine the order in which employees are protected during layoffs: tenure, veterans’ preference, seniority, and performance in that order of importance. Despite several attempts in the House of Representatives during the Trump years to enact legislation that would modestly increase the weight given to performance over time-of-service, the fierce opposition by federal managers associations and unions representing long-serving but not necessarily well-performing constituents explains why the bills failed to advance. A determined President should insist that performance be first and be wary of costly types of reductions-in-force. Impenetrable Bureaucracy. The GAO has identified almost a hundred actions that the executive branch or Congress could take to improve efficiency and effec- tiveness across 37 areas that span a broad range of government missions and functions. It identified 33 actions to address mission fragmentation, overlap, and duplication in the 12 areas of defense, economic development, health, homeland security, and information technology. It also identified 59 other opportunities for executive agencies or Congress to reduce the cost of government operations or enhance revenue collection across 25 areas of government.20 A logical place to begin would be to identify and eliminate functions and pro- grams that are duplicated across Cabinet departments or spread across multiple agencies. Congress hoped to help this effort by passing the Government Perfor- mance and Results Act of 1993,21 which required all federal agencies to define their missions, establish goals and objectives, and measure and report their per- formance to Congress. Three decades of endless time-consuming reports later, the government continues to grow but with more paper and little change either in performance or in the number of levels between government and the people. The Brookings Institution’s Paul Light emphasizes the importance of the increasing number of levels between the top heads of departments and the people at the bottom who receive the products of government decision-making. He esti- mates that there are perhaps 50 or more levels of impenetrable bureaucracy and no way other than imperfect performance appraisals to communicate between them.22 The Trump Administration proposed some possible consolidations, but these were not received favorably in Congress, whose approval is necessary for most such proposals. The best solution is to cut functions and budgets and devolve respon- sibilities. That is a challenge primarily for Presidents, Congress, and the entire government, but the OPM still needs to lead the way governmentwide in managing personnel properly even in any future smaller government. Creating a Responsible Career Management Service. The people elect a President who is charged by Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution23 with seeing that the laws are “faithfully executed” with his political appointees democratically linked to that legitimizing responsibility. An autonomous bureaucracy has neither — 80 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise independent constitutional status nor separate moral legitimacy. Therefore, career civil servants by themselves should not lead major policy changes and reforms. The creation of the Senior Executive Service was the top career change intro- duced by the 1978 Carter–Campbell Civil Service Reform Act. Its aim was to professionalize the career service and make it more responsible to the democrat- ically elected commander in chief and his political appointees while respecting the rights due to career employees, very much including those in the top positions. The new SES would allow management to be more flexible in filling and reassigning executive positions and locations beyond narrow specialties for more efficient mission accomplishment and would provide pay and large bonuses to motivate career performance. The desire to infiltrate political appointees improperly into the high career civil service has been widespread in every Administration, whether Democrat or Republican. Democratic Administrations, however, are typically more successful because they require the cooperation of careerists, who generally lean heavily to the Left. Such burrowing-in requires career job descriptions for new positions that closely mirror the functions of a political appointee; a special hiring authority that allows the bypassing of veterans’ preference as well as other preference categories; and the ability to frustrate career candidates from taking the desired position. President Reagan’s OPM began by limiting such SES burrowing-in, arguing that the proper course was to create and fill political positions. This simultane- ously promotes the CSRA principle of political leadership of the bureaucracy and respects the professional autonomy of the career service. But this requires that career SES employees should respect political rights too. Actions such as career staff reserving excessive numbers of key policy positions as “career reserved” to deny them to noncareer SES employees frustrate CSRA intent. Another evasion is the general domination by career staff on SES personnel evaluation boards, the opposite of noncareer executives dominating these critical meeting discussions as expected in the SES. Career training also often underplays the political role in leadership and inculcates career-first policy and value viewpoints. Frustrated with these activities by top career executives, the Trump Adminis- tration issued Executive Order 1395724 to make career professionals in positions that are not normally subject to change as a result of a presidential transition but who discharge significant duties and exercise significant discretion in formulating and implementing executive branch policy and programs an exception to the com- petitive hiring rules and examinations for career positions under a new Schedule F. It ordered the Director of OPM and agency heads to set procedures to prepare lists of such confidential, policy-determining, policymaking, or policy-advocating positions and prepare procedures to create exceptions from civil service rules when careerists hold such positions, from which they can relocate back to the regular civil service after such service. The order was subsequently reversed by President

Introduction

Moderate62.9%
Pages: 75-77

— 43 — 2 EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES Russ Vought In its opening words, Article II of the U.S. Constitution makes it abundantly clear that “[t]he executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”1 That enormous power is not vested in departments or agencies, in staff or administrative bodies, in nongovernmental organizations or other equities and interests close to the government. The President must set and enforce a plan for the executive branch. Sadly, however, a President today assumes office to find a sprawling federal bureaucracy that all too often is carrying out its own policy plans and preferences—or, worse yet, the policy plans and preferences of a radical, supposedly “woke” faction of the country. The modern conservative President’s task is to limit, control, and direct the executive branch on behalf of the American people. This challenge is created and exacerbated by factors like Congress’s decades-long tendency to delegate its lawmaking power to agency bureaucracies, the pervasive notion of expert “inde- pendence” that protects so-called expert authorities from scrutiny, the presumed inability to hold career civil servants accountable for their performance, and the increasing reality that many agencies are not only too big and powerful, but also increasingly weaponized against the public and a President who is elected by the people and empowered by the Constitution to govern. In Federalist No. 47, James Madison warned that “[t]he accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”2 Regrettably, that wise and cautionary note describes to a significant degree the modern executive branch, which—whether controlled — 44 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise by the bureaucracy or by the President—writes federal policy, enforces that policy, and often adjudicates whether that policy was properly drafted and enforced. The overall situation is constitutionally dire, unsustainably expensive, and in urgent need of repair. Nothing less than the survival of self-governance in America is at stake. The great challenge confronting a conservative President is the existential need for aggressive use of the vast powers of the executive branch to return power— including power currently held by the executive branch—to the American people. Success in meeting that challenge will require a rare combination of boldness and self-denial: boldness to bend or break the bureaucracy to the presidential will and self-denial to use the bureaucratic machine to send power away from Washington and back to America’s families, faith communities, local governments, and states. Fortunately, a President who is willing to lead will find in the Executive Office of the President (EOP) the levers necessary to reverse this trend and impose a sound direction for the nation on the federal bureaucracy. The effectiveness of those EOP levers depends on the fundamental premise that it is the President’s agenda that should matter to the departments and agencies that operate under his constitutional authority and that, as a general matter, it is the President’s chosen advisers who have the best sense of the President’s aims and intentions, both with respect to the policies he intends to enact and with respect to the interests that must be secured to govern successfully on behalf of the American people. This chapter focuses on key features of and recommendations for several of the EOP’s important components. U.S. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (OMB) OMB assists the President in the execution of his policy agenda across the gov- ernment by employing many statutory and executive procedural levers to bring the bureaucracy in line with all budgetary, regulatory, and management decisions. Properly understood, it is a President’s air-traffic control system with the abil- ity and charge to ensure that all policy initiatives are flying in sync and with the authority to let planes take off and, at times, ground planes that are flying off course. OMB’s key roles include: l Developing and enforcing the President’s budget and executing the appropriations laws that fund the government; l Managing agency and personnel performance, procurement policy, financial management, and information technology; l Developing the President’s regulatory agenda, reviewing new regulatory actions, reviewing federal information collections, and setting and enforcing federal information policy; and

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills