OMB Approves OPM Civil Service Decline Final Rule

Yesterday the OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) announced that it had approved (with change) the final rule submitted by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) on “Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service”. The notice of proposed rulemaking for this final rule was published on March 23^rd, 2025.

According to the Spring 2025 Unified Agenda entry for this rulemaking:

“OPM plans to finalize a rulemaking implementing E.O. 14171 [link added]. The proposed rule would create the procedures for moving policy-influencing positions into Schedule Policy/Career, which would increase career employee accountability. Schedule Policy/Career positions will remain career jobs filled on a nonpartisan basis. Yet they will be at-will positions excepted from adverse action procedures or appeals. This will allow agencies to quickly remove employees from critical positions who engage in misconduct, perform poorly, or obstruct the democratic process by intentionally subverting Presidential directives.”

The current civil service program was specifically designed to prevent federal jobs from being part of a political patronage system. While recognizing that above a certain level, management of the federal bureaucracy is political in nature (and thus requiring presidential appointment), most federal jobs require some level of practical expertise and experience to fairly and efficiently operate and oversee federal programs. Those jobs should not be subject to political litmus tests that change with every change in administration.

While I am sure that the folks at the Heritage Foundation have done an admirable job of cloaking their intent to rid the swamp of any liberal employees in language that would appear to be purely focused on efficiency and efficacy, the brief history of this administration makes it clear that ‘performance’ in the 47th Administration means fealty to, and adoration of, the royal executive. That makes this rulemaking suspect at best.

This rulemaking is outside of the typical scope of coverage of this blog, so I will probably not devote any significant coverage to it, but I will certainly mention its publication in the appropriate Short Takes post.