In general, how do you feel about President Trump’s recent moves aimed at reshaping the federal workforce?

👍 Support (35%) – "It has never been a priority to evaluate the federal workforce so I'm thrilled that any President is taking the time to do so. It isn't that I think there's any explicit wrongdoing, but when government agencies get to operate on other people's money and are essentially unchecked, things can add up quickly. Some departments are doing things they weren't created to do and not doing things they were created to do and, unfortunately, the only quick way to figure out what is what is to start with a pretty clean slate. I love the move to dismantle DEI at the federal level to increase efficiency - it served a purpose at one point but we really need to focus on right person for the job regardless of race/gender/etc., not diversity person over all else."

• "It is not a new story that we have nonsensical positions in office. It is a waste of taxpayer money, too, to have offices that no one is working in. It seems anything you do in government has several more steps and has to be passed along to several more people than it truly needs to. I know its harsh, but they are at least giving some pretty good separation packages - these RIF'ed employees are not being left high and dry."

"I worked for the Federal Government and it is a bloated bureaucracy which does not reward good work/innovation but rather promotes those that supervisors want gone because firing the worthless is so time intensive to do and keep records of. Government is in desperate need of streamlining, accountability for processes and personnel and the elimination of red tape ensuring fairness rather than outcomes. It's why everything has cost over runs and a lot of 'junk' that needs 'fixed' or modified later at even more cost. Unions have NO PLACE in government and should be disallowed or extremely limited as an advisory service; a government job should be focused on serving the public not the employee."

• "I don't want anyone to lose their jobs, but if a company or organization is unhealthy, hard decisions have to be made to keep it alive and healthy for everyone else who relies on it. So, I don't implicitly disagree with shrinking the gov work force. I'm also pretty happy about the rolling back of DEI programs - while I think it's important to recognize the different experiences of people from different backgrounds and interact with them with empathy, I think it's irresponsible to make that grounds for a hiring quota. We'll see what happens in regards to the other changes being made."

👎 Oppose (47%) – "I do think there are many areas of the federal government that are bloated and need some trimming, but blanket sweeping changes will have unintended consequences and not requiring government contractors to abide by civil-rights laws is just one example of going too far. All companies working, with or inside the US should be required to abide by civil-rights laws or we should not be working with them. That is a matter of common decency."

• "Every organization has employees that are productive and those that are not. The people I know that are federal employees care about what they do and have chosen to work at the government level because they care. If it were about the money, they would work for a different organization because the pay is greater working for other companies. Like every organization, there should be audits of employee performance and spending of the federal government but at the division level. Each government agency has their own purpose and job requirements; you can’t just lump them together. Making broad swipes across the whole federal organization is an approach based on assumptions and runs the risk of losing productive, not just nonproductive employees."

"Government should be as diverse as the people it governs, both to create better policies that take into account a broad range of realities for Americans, and also to create greater trust of government workers. Meritocracy is not equitable and does not create a better society; it privileges those whose family background is more rich and therefore enables them to succeed more easily than others. Racism can easily impact hires; studies have shown applicants with last names that are typically Black have NOT been selected for roles, when the same resume with a White sounding name has gotten a pass."

• "The government agencies Trump wants to eliminate are those that help people when they need additional help. It's the last thing he should be doing. If he eliminates FEMA that will be a huge disaster. How can a state help itself when The helpers are those that have been affected by the disaster. The other agencies he's considering dismantling like the CDC, INH, help keep Americans healthy. These agencies may not be perfect but surely they're not to be thrown away."

"DEI can often have some silly results, but when Trump removes people investigating sexual assault in the military, that is a tragedy that should be avoided. I would rather taxes go towards DEI and have wasteful spending if it means justice is served."

↔️ Neutral (9%) – "I support the streamlining of government in a thoughtful way but simply hacking off groups like DEI associates seems biased and uninformed."

🤷‍♀️ Unsure/other (9%) – "The government is certainly bloated, but I’m concerned these actions will be seen as endorsing favoritism in employment vs actual merit. Too many people/businesses will see this as an opportunity to not even consider workers with valuable skill sets if they aren’t the “right” race/gender/other prejudice."